Licensing, Partnering, Strategic Alliances and University Relationships

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley Daniel Blakeslee
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Strategic Alliances ◽  
Biotechnology Industry ◽  
University Research ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

Abstract The biopharmaceutical industry has been undergoing change for a number of years and that change is accelerating.  Larger pharmaceutical companies are acquiring smaller ones, companies are merging, laboratories are being closed, and the number of scientists performing research in the pharmaceutical industry is declining.  Overall, commercial industry, including the biotechnology industry, is becoming more interested in the benefits of collaboration with research institutions.Universities are also changing their view of relationships with industry.  Shrinking federal budgets are causing universities to look at other sources of revenue, including collaborations with industry.  Federal and state governments are also looking closely at the benefits of sponsoring university research, and in particular are seeking to accelerate commercialization of university discoveries not only to obtain the benefit of invested research dollars, but also for economic development and job growth.  Universities, and in particular university technology transfer offices, must understand these changes and adapt to them. This paper discusses the university/industry relationships, and the particular issues important to universities which shape that interface. 

scholarly journals Models, Processes, and Roles of Universities in Technology Transfer Management: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Maresova ◽  
Ruzena Stemberkova ◽  
Oluwaseun Fadeyi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Emerging Economies ◽  
Academic Entrepreneurship ◽  
Government Investment ◽  
Management Of Technology ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

Universities play pivotal roles when research findings are to be adopted commercially. Although these roles vary from one country to another, effective patenting and licensing procedures, as well as eventual commercialisation of scholarly inventions, reflect hard work on the part of the University mediating between the researcher and the industry through technology transfer offices (TTOs) in order to ensure that knowledge-developers take motivational and monetary credit for their findings. This paper details some existing models, processes, and roles taken up in some countries where sharing of intellectual property exists, and links it up with aspects of university–industry technology transfer, such as policies surrounding patenting, government investment and marketing, and the process of academic entrepreneurship, among others. 22 articles were found via a systematic review of literature and analysed with respect to four identified areas of focus: internal strategy, investment and market, academic entrepreneurship and policy. Based on models, processes, and roles in reviewed studies, our results indicate that new models for technology transfer mainly stem from the fact that there is no universally accepted model in the literature. Furthermore, management of technology transfer is mostly the responsibility of TTOs in most countries. While university TTOs act as intermediaries to protect the interest of the author/inventor, issues such as poor relationships between universities and industry, as well as funding, remain major challenges in many emerging economies. In contrast, researchers in western economies are mainly challenged by financial motivation and recognition within the academic domains.

University knowledge, open innovation and technological capital in Spanish science parks

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Villasalero
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
University Research ◽  
Firm Innovation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
Spanish Universities ◽  
Administrator Perspective ◽  
Technological Capital ◽  
The University

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the connection between university research and technological capital developed by science park (SCP) firms in order to elucidate whether the causal linkage is owing to non-pecuniary research spillovers or pecuniary technology transfer activities. Design/methodology/approach – Two publicly available surveys, one dealing with the research and transfer activities of 45 Spanish universities and another with the patenting activities of 44 Spanish SCPs, are matched in such a way that hypotheses can be tested using regression analysis. Findings – The patenting performance of SCP firms is positively related to the competitive R&D projects undertaken by the universities to which they are affiliated and negatively related to the technology transfer activities carried out by those universities. These findings suggest that the scientific knowledge produced by universities principally contributes to private technology-based firms’ technological capital through non-pecuniary research spillovers, whereas the pecuniary technology transfer agreements remain uncertain or may even prove to be detrimental. Practical implications – Firms that are considering locating or remaining in a university-affiliated SCP should be aware that the university's pecuniary orientation when managing its intellectual capital may become a barrier as regards the firm filling its technological capital shortages. From a university administrator perspective, the complementary or substitute role of technology transfer offices vis-à-vis SCPs should be considered in the light of the selling or revealing approach adopted by the university in order to commercialize and diffuse potential inventions. Originality/value – This study contributes to existing literature by shedding light on the causal linkage between university research and firm innovation, obtaining evidence in favor of an upstream, non-pecuniary and revealing role of universities in support of the accumulation of technological capital amongst SCPs tenant firms.

scholarly journals Responsible Research and Innovation in the Context of University Technology Transfer

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (328) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerzy Piotr Gwizdała ◽  
Karol Śledzik
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Responsible Innovation ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
University Technology ◽  
Google Books ◽  
The University ◽  
Responsible Research

The term „Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)” has been increasingly used for over a decade. The RRI concept is not currently well defined. The theory of RRI is not developed enough and there are still conceptual divergences. This paper introduces the issue of Responsible Research and Innovation and addresses the following key questions: How do we define RRI? Where do we stand in terms of understanding the RRI dimensions presented in literature? What is the role of RRI in the university technology transfer activity? The study is based on literature search on the Scopus (www.scopus.com), EBSCO (www.ebsco.com), Google Scholar (scholar.google.com) and Google Books (books.google.com) databases to obtain articles published in peer reviewed journals, related to the concept of RRI and technology transfer. The search terms (for title and topic) were: responsible innovation, responsible research and innovation, RRI, technology transfer. Critical analysis of the state of knowledge allowed to propose a set of seven conceptual dimensions (inclusion, anticipation, responsiveness, reflexivity, sustainability, care and economic) of the Responsible Research and Innovation concept that may be implemented in technology transfer processes executed at universities. RRI concept is still under development. A discussion around the conceptual dimensions of RRI will be followed by the strategic challenges of universities. The study resulted in two conclusions. Firstly, the RRI concept may shift the focus of TTOs (Technology Transfer Offices) from outcomes (revenues, cash flow, rate of return, patents, license fee, etc.) to processes, which further leads to the second conclusion, that all seven presented conceptual dimensions should indicate particular types of processes in university TTO. Fulfillment of these two conclusions makes possible to implement RRI on University in a wider perspective, than just fulfill the requirements of administrative funders.

scholarly journals Co-Evolution of the University Technology Transfer: Towards a Sustainability-Oriented Industry: Evidence from Italy

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola Paniccia ◽  
Silvia Baiocco
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Future Research ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
Triple Helix Model ◽  
Management Of Technology ◽  
University Technology ◽  
Managerial Implications ◽  
The University ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
University Industry

Industry is continuously evolving, reflecting changes in society. An important aspect of this evolution concerns how new digital technologies are used and their effects on innovation and sustainability. Thus, the relationship between university, industry, and government grows stronger, shifting the focus on technology transfer processes from university to industry, at local and national levels. To increase our understanding of how these processes take place, more theoretical and empirical research is required. This paper aims to respond to this call by examining the university technology transfer through a co-evolutionary approach. The study analyses the dynamics of the relationships at different organisational levels within universities able to create sustainability-oriented innovative university spin-offs and start-ups, through the Italian National Innovation Award case. The findings show that the creation of these spin-offs and start-ups are the result of effective multi-level co-evolutionary adaptations within universities, and among university, industry and government. The article contributes to the further understanding of the management of technology transfer by combining some elements from the literature about the co-evolution of social organisations and their environment with some elements from the Triple Helix model of innovation. Moreover, both theoretical and managerial implications emerge, together with suggestions for future research.

China’s Science-Based Innovation and Technology Transfer in the Global Context

2021 ◽  
pp. 314-336
Author(s):  
Jizhen Li ◽  
Ximing Yin ◽  
Subrina Shen
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Industrial Revolution ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Global Context ◽  
Innovation And Technology ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry ◽  
Critical Overview ◽  
And Diffusion ◽  
University Industry Linkages

Science-based innovation in universities and diffusion through university-industry linkages are the keys to strengthening national innovation capability, especially for emerging markets. This chapter provides a critical overview of China’s innovation and technology transfer between the university and industry in the context of globalization and the new industrial revolution. By doing this, the chapter attempts to provide critical insights for relevant stakeholders—whether they be researchers, innovators, entrepreneurs, government officials, investors, or international organizations—in China’s development, innovation, and technology transfer. The chapter illustrates three aspects related to China’s innovation and technology transfer in comparison with other major players in the field. Then it further analyzes the drivers and challenges of China’s science-based innovation and university technology transfer for understanding the future of China’s innovation and technology transfer.

Knowledge and Technology Transfer Support Potential of Intermediate Organizations

2015 ◽  
pp. 143-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Kesting ◽  
Bernd Wurth
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Business Practice ◽  
University Environment ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Knowledge And Technology Transfer ◽  
Marketing Service ◽  
The University ◽  
Theoretical Considerations

This chapter aims at analyzing and optimizing the requirements of the internal environment regarding university-business cooperation (UBC). It focuses on university Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs), intermediate organizations embedded within the university environment. They support knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) activities, particularly the commercialization of research-based products. TTOs are supposed to accelerate and facilitate KTT from science into business practice. Although literature on university research commercialization highlights the relevance of transfer support by TTOs, empirical studies and KTT practice show that TTO services are used rather sparsely. Based on theoretical considerations and results of recent empirical studies on KTT, this chapter discusses two practice cases to derive indicators for a better exploitation of unused KTT support potential of TTOs. The results show that personal engagement aimed at a marketing service provider philosophy emerges as the key factor for fostering and intensifying cooperation between researchers and TTOs.

Case Studies of North American University Performance in Technology Transfer and Commercialization

2010 ◽  
pp. 1-51
Author(s):  
Alan Collier ◽  
Fang Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
North American ◽  
University President ◽  
American University ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
University Performance ◽  
The University ◽  
Ability And Willingness

This chapter reports on case studies of four North American universities engaged in technology transfer and commercialization. The literature and case studies permitted an understanding of the characteristics possessed by universities and university technology transfer offices that appear to be successful in technology transfer and commercialization. Fourteen characteristics, or institutional enablers, are identified and analyzed in order to determine which among these characteristics have greater influence in the success of technology transfer offices. The chapter concludes that universities with superior-performing technology transfer offices possess two factors in common. First, the university President and other executives concerned in commercialization have to believe in it and make a genuine commitment to its success. Second, the technology transfer office has to be led by an individual who possesses several attributes: the ability and willingness to work within the university structure; the ability to be both an entrepreneur and a manager; the ability to see what is happening in technology transfer and commercialization as it evolves and matures; and to be a leader of people and business.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document