A managerial view of academic technology transfer: a benchmarking analysis on some european university tto

Author/s Mariacarmela Passarelli, Michele Costabile
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/4
Language Italian Pages 34 P. 265-298 File size 107 KB
DOI 10.3280/POLI2014-004012
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Starting from a literature analysis on the main drivers for technology transfer performance, this paper provides a multiple case analysis on technology transfer offices (TTOs) in European universities, by developing a benchmarking analysis of some successful experiences. The paper proposes a managerial approach for technology transfer offices by analyzing the main variables that have an impact on their performance. The results offer highlights on the business models of technology transfer offices, on their organizational model, on their bundle of competences and on their activities. The suggestion for policy makers and practitioners is to overcome the technology push approach and go ahead, by adopting a real technology - marketing perspective.

Keywords: Technology transfer office, technology push approach, entrepreneurial university, research exploitation

Jel codes: O32

  1. Abrams I., Leung G., Stevens A.J. 2009. How are US technology transfer offices tasked and motivated. Is it all about the money?. Research Management Review, 17 (1): 1-34.
  2. Anderson T.R., Daim T.U., Lavoie F.F. 2007. Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation, 27: 306-318, DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2006.10.003
  3. Anonimo. 2012. What the job market wants. New York Times, October 25.
  4. ASTP. 2012. Salary Survey Report. ASTP-Proton, Association of European Science and Technology Transfer Professional: Leiden. AUTM. 2012. US Licensing Activity Survey. Association of University Technology
  5. Manager: Deerfield.
  6. Balderi C., Daniele C., Piccaluga A. 2012. Gli uffici di trasferimento tecnologico delle città italiane: numeri ma non solo numeri. Economia e Politica Industriale, 39 (4): 135-159, DOI: 10.3280/POLI2012-004006
  7. Baycan T., Stough R.R. 2012. Proof of concept centers and innovative local regional development, in Baycan T. (ed.) Knowledge Commercialization and Valorization in Regional Economic Development: International Perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham.
  8. Benneworth P. 2007. Seven samurai opening up the ivory tower? The construction of Newcastle as an entrepreneurial university. European Planning Studies, 15 (4): 487-509, DOI: 10.1080/09654310601133286.BercovitzJ.,FeldmanM.,FellerI.,BurtonR.2001.Organizationalstructureasadeterminantofacademicpatentandlicensingbehavior:anexploratorystudyofDuke,JohnsHopkinsandPennsylvaniaStateUniversities.JournalofTechnologyTransfer,26(1-2):21-35,doi:10.1023/A:1007828026904
  9. Bercovitz J., Feldman M. 2006. Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: a conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (1): 175-188, DOI: 10.1007/s10961-005-5029-z
  10. Bianchi M., Chiaroni D., Frattini F., Minola T. 2013. Entrepreneurial university and technology transfer offices: a dynamic capability view on the determinants of superior performance, in Welter F., Blackburn B., Ljunggren E., Åmo B.W. (eds.) Entrepreneurial, Business and Society, Frontiers in European Entrepreneurship Research. Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham.
  11. Bonaccorsi A., Daraio C. 2007. Universities and Strategic Knowledge Creation. Specialization and Performance in Europe. Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham.
  12. Camp R.C. 1989. Benchmarking: the search for best practices that lead to superior perfomance: part V. Quality Progress, 22 (5): 66-68.
  13. Carlsson B., Fridh A.C. 2002. Technology transfer in united states universities: a survey and statistical analysis. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12 (1-2): 199-232, DOI: 10.1007/s00191-002-0105-0
  14. Chapple W., Lockett A., Siegel D., Wright M. 2005. Assessing the relative performance of UK university technology transfer offices: parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34 (3): 369-384, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.007
  15. Lichtenthaler U. 2007. The drivers of technology licensing: an industry comparison. California Management Review, 49 (4): 67-89, DOI: 10.2307/41166406
  16. Clarysse B., Tartari V., Salter A. 2011. The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40 (8): 1084-1093, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.010
  17. Closs L., Cardozo Ferreira G., Freitas Soria A., Sampaio C.H., Perin M. 2012. Organizational factors that affect the university-industry technology transfer processes of a private university. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7 (1): 104-117, doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242012000100007.
  18. Commissione europea. 2014. Innovation Union Scoreboard, published on line. CUCW. 2013. Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), published online.
  19. Debackere K., Veugelers R. 2005. The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34 (3): 321-342, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2004.12.003
  20. De Zilwa D. 2005. Using entrepreneurial activities as a means of survival: investigating the processes used by Australian universities to diversify their revenue streams. Higher Education, 50 (3): 387-411, DOI: 10.1007/s10734-004-6359-8
  21. Geuna A., Muscio A. 2009. The governance of university knowledge transfer: a critical review of the literature. Minerva, 47 (1): 93-114, DOI: 10.1007/s11024-009-9118-2
  22. Gibson D., Jarrett J., Resendez D.N. 2013. BTP-best transfer practices. A tool for qualitative analysis of tech-transfer offices: a cross cultural analysis. Technovation, 33 (1): 2-12, DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2012.09.001
  23. Harmon B., Ardishvili A., Cardozo R., Elder T., Leuthold J., Parshall J., Raghian M., Donald S. 1997. Mapping the university technology transfer process. Journal of Business Venturing, 12 (6): 423-434, DOI: 10.1016/S0883-9026(96)00064-X.HollandersH.,Es-SadkiN.,BuligescuB.,RiveraLeonL.,GrinieceE.,RomanL.2014.RegionalInnovationScoreboard,publishedonline
  24. Hsu D.H., Bernstein T. 1997. Managing the university technology licensing process: findings from case studies. Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 9 (9): 1-33.
  25. Karlöf B., Östblom S. 1993. Benchmarking: A signpost to Excellence in Quality and Productivity. Wiley: Chichester-New York.
  26. Khabiri N., Rast S., Senin A.A. 2013. Identifying main influential elements in technology transfer process: a conceptual model. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 40: 417-423, DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.209
  27. Kim Y. 2013. The ivory tower approach to entrepreneurial linkage: productivity changes in university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38 (2): 180-197, DOI: 10.1007/s10961-011-9217-8
  28. Kirby D.A. 2005. Creating entrepreneurial universities in the UK: applying entrepreneurship theory to practice. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (5): 599-603, DOI: 10.1007/s10961-006-9061-4
  29. Kurman M. 2011. An index-based measure of university technology transfer. International Journal of Innovation Science, 3 (4): 167-176, DOI: 10.1260/1757-2223.3.4.167
  30. Lach S., Schankerman M. 2008. Incentives and invention in universities. The RAND Journal of Economics, 39 (2): 403-433, DOI: 10.1111/j.0741-6261.2008.00020.x
  31. Landry R., Amara N., Cloutier J.-S., Halilem N. 2013. Technology transfer organizations: services and business models. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33 (12): 431-449, DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2013.09.008
  32. Lazzaretti L., Tavoletti E. 2005. Higher education excellence and local economic development: the case of the entrepreneurial university of Twente. European Planning Studies, 13 (3): 475-493, DOI: 10.1080/09654310500089779
  33. Lissoni F. 2012. Intellectual property and university-industry technology transfer in Europe and the US. Economia e Politica Industriale, 39 (3): 35-54, DOI: 10.3280/POLI2012-003003
  34. Litan R., Mitchell L., Reedy E. 2007. The university as innovator: bumps in the road. Issues in Science and Technology, 23 (4): 57-66.
  35. Lofsten H., Lindelof P. 2005. R&D networks and product innovation patterns-academic and non-academic new technology-based firms on science parks. Technovation, 25 (9): 1025-1037, DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2004.02.007
  36. Macho S.I., Pérez C.D., Veugelers R. 2006. Licensing of university inventions: the role of a technology transfer office. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25 (3): 483-510, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2006.06.001
  37. Metz B., Davidson O.R., Martens J., Rooijen S.N.M.V., McGrory L.V.W. 2000. Methodological and Technological Issues in Technology Transfer, A Special Report of IPCC Working Group III. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge (UK).
  38. Netval. 2014. XI rapporto Netval sulla valorizzazione della ricerca pubblica italiana. Associazione Netval, Network per la valorizzazione della ricerca universitaria: Milano. O’Shea A., Chevalier A., Roche F. 2005. Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 4 (7): 994-1009, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.011
  39. O’Shea R.P., Allen T.J., Morse K.P., O’Gorman C., Roche F. 2007. Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: the Massachusetts institute of technology experience. R&D Management, 37 (1): 1-16.
  40. Owen-Smith J., Powell W.W. 2001. To patent or not: faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1-2): 99-114, DOI: 10.1023/A:1007892413701
  41. Passarelli M., Costabile M. 2009. Attori e ruoli emergenti nelle politiche per l’innovazione e il trasferimento tecnologico. Il caso dell’università della Calabria. Rassegna Economica, 1: 163-176.
  42. Patton D. 2010. University spin-offs and emerging clusters: some lessons from North American universities. Economia e Politica Industriale, 37 (4): 129-139, DOI: 10.3280/POLI2012-004006
  43. Patton D., Kenney M. 2010. The role of the university in the genesis and evolution of research-based clusters, in Fornahl D., Henn S., Menzel M.P. (eds.) Emerging Clusters Theoretical, Empirical and Political Perspectives on the Initial Stage of Cluster Evolution. Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham.
  44. Powers J.B., McDougall P.P. 2005. University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: a resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20 (3): 291-311, DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.12.008
  45. Ranga L.M., Debackere K., von Tunzelmann N. 2003. Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: a case study of basic vs. applied research in Belgium. Scientometrics, 58 (2): 301-320, DOI: 10.1023/A:1026288611013
  46. Rasmussen E., Sørheim R. 2012. Obtaining early-stage financing for technology entrepreneurship: reassessing the demand-side perspective. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 14 (2-3): 77-89, DOI: 10.1080/13691066.2012.667908
  47. Renault C. 2006. Academic capitalism and university: incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (2): 227-239, DOI: 10.1007/s10961-005-6108-x
  48. Roessner D., Bond J., Okubo S., Planting M. 2009. The Economic Impact of Licensed Commercialized Inventions Originating in University Research, 1996-2007. Report to the Biotechnology Industry Organization. Biotechnology Industry Organization: Washington.
  49. Rogers E.M., Yin Y., Hoffmann J. 2000. Accessing the effectiveness of technology transfer offices at US research universities. Journal of Association of University Technology Managers, 12 (1): 47-80,
  50. Rothaermel F., Agung S., Jiang L. 2007. University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (4): 691-791, DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtm023
  51. Shane S. 2002. Executive forum: university technology transfer to entrepreneurial companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17 (6): 537-552, DOI: 10.1016/S0883-9026(01)00084-2.SiegelD.S.,WaldmanD.A.,LinkA.N.2003.Assessingtheimpactoforganizationalpracticesontheproductivityofuniversitytechnologytransferoffices:anexploratorystudy.ResearchPolicy,32(1),27-48,doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2
  52. Siegel D.S., Waldman D.A., Atwater L.E., Link A.N. 2003. Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: improving the effectiveness of university-industry collaboration. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14 (1): 111-133, DOI: 10.1016/S1047-8310(03)00007-5
  53. Siegel D.S., Waldman D.A., Atwater L., Link A.N. 2004. Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21 (1-2): 115-142, DOI: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2003.12.006
  54. Siegel D.S., Phan P.H. 2005. Analyzing the effectiveness of university technology transfer: implications for entrepreneurship education, in Liebcap G. (ed.) Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Growth. Elsevier Science-JAI Press: Amsterdam.
  55. Swamidass P.M., Vulasa V. 2009. Why university inventions rarely produce income? Bottlenecks in university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34 (4): 343-363, DOI: 10.1007/s10961-008-9097-8
  56. Teece D.J. 1981. The market for know-how and the efficient international transfer of technology. Annals of the Political and Social Science, 458: 81-96, DOI: 10.1177/000271628145800107
  57. Teece D.J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15 (6): 285-305, DOI: 10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2
  58. Thursby J.G., Jensen R.A., Thursby M.C. 2001. Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: a survey of major US universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1-2): 59-70, DOI: 10.1023/A:1007884111883
  59. Thursby J.G., Kemp S. 2002. Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy, 31 (1): 109-124, DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00160-8
  60. Thursby J.G., Thursby M.C. 2002. Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science, 48 (1): 90-104, DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.
  61. Thursby J.G., Thursby M.C. 2003. Industry/university licensing: characteristics, concerns and issues from the perspective of the buyer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28 (3-4): 207-213, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.011
  62. Tijssen R. 2006. Universities and industrially relevant science: towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation. Research Policy, 36 (10): 1569-1585, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.025
  63. Tornatzky L.G. 2000. Building State Economies by Promoting University-Industry Technology Transfer. National Governor’s Association: Washington.
  64. Tushman M., Katz R. 1983. A longitudinal study of the effects of boundary spanning supervision on turnover and promotion in research and development. Academy of Management Journal, 26 (3): 437-459, DOI: 10.2307/256255.YorkA.S.,AhnM.J.2012.Universitytechnologytransferofficesuccessfactors:acomparativecasestudy.InternationalJournalofTechnologyTransfer&Commercialisation,11(1-2):26-50,doi:10.1504/IJTTC.2012.043910
  65. Zhao F. 2004. Academic entrepreneurship: case study of Australian universities. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 5 (2): 91-97, DOI: 10.5367/000000004773863246
  66. Zucker L.G., Darby M.R., Armstrong J.S. 2002. Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science, 48 (1): 138-153, DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.

  • Organizational Design, Family Business and 'Good' Conflict: A Theoretical Model Mario Pezzillo Iacono, Alessia Berni, in SSRN Electronic Journal /2012
    DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2115395
  • Cultural Due Diligence as a Proactive Strategy of Organisational Change: An Empirical Analysys Mario Pezzillo Iacono, in SSRN Electronic Journal /2012
    DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2115444

Mariacarmela Passarelli, Michele Costabile, Un approccio manageriale al trasferimento tecnologico: un’analisi di benchmarking sui TTO universitari europei in "ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE " 4/2014, pp 265-298, DOI: 10.3280/POLI2014-004012