Abstract
The task of recognizing valuable technological opportunities is crucial for the organizations in charge of transferring technology from universities and publicly funded research institutes to the market. Difficulties in understanding the true commercial potential of an application result in failed subsequent commercialization and excess costs of technology transfer. This paper describes how the task of opportunity recognition is performed in five Technology Transfer Organizations (TTOs). The analyzed TTOs had different degree of independence to the structure of the parent and make use of information and competencies acquired through their formal and informal network ties.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
But all IPRs of innovations produced as part of the normal employment agreements so far remained to the professors.
This law was revised in 2004. In the new arrangement, the professor’s privilege is confirmed, but the inventors of patents have a formal duty of informing their institutions. Additionally, the latter have a march-in right in case one of those patents is left unexploited.
References
Arrow, K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Bray, M. J., & Lee, J. N. (2000). University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 385–392.
Cable, D. M., & Shane, S. (1997). A prisoner’s dilemma approach to entrepreneur–venture capitalist relationship. Academy of Management Review, 22, 142–176.
Dasgupta, P., & David, P. A. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23, 487–521.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Cantisano Terra, B. R. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330.
Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J., & Burton, R. (2002). Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American Research Universities. Management Science, 48, 105–121.
Franklin, S. J., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in University spin-out companies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 127–141.
Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The tale of university licensing. American Economic Review, 91, 240–259.
Lee, Y. S. (1996). ‘Technology transfer’ and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university–industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25, 843–863.
Martin, S., & Scott, J. T. (2000). The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation. Research Policy, 29, 437–447.
Murray, G. C., & Lott, J. (1995). Have UK venture capitalists a bias against investment in new technology-based firms? Research Policy, 24, 283–299.
Nelson, R. (1959). The simple economics of basic scientific research. Journal of Political Economy, 67(3), 297–306.
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 99–114.
Roberts, E. B. (1991). High stakes for high-tech entrepreneurs: Understanding venture capital decision making. Sloan Management Review, 32(2), 9–20 (Winter).
Sampat, B. N., & Nelson, R. R. (1999). The emergence and standardization of University Technology transfer offices: A case study of institutional change, Prepared for 1999 Conference of the International Society for the New Institutional Economics (ISNIE), pp. 16–18, World Bank, Washington, District of Columbia, September.
Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Management Science, 11(4), 448–469.
Shane, S., & Cable, D. (2002). Network ties, reputation, and the financing of new ventures. Management Science, 48(3), 364–381.
Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of University start-ups. Management Science, 48, 154–170.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2003a). Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14, 111–133.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. N. (2003b). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27–48.
Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major U.S. Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 59–72.
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2002). Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in University licensing. Management Science, 48, 90–104.
UNICO (2003). UK University commercialization survey: Financial year 2002. Belfast: Association for University Research and Industry Links (AURIL).
Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33, 147–175.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Franzoni, C. Opportunity recognition in technology transfer organizations. Int Entrep Manag J 3, 51–67 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-006-0014-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-006-0014-z