Main Article Content

Abstract

Abstract. Research product commercialization becomes the problem in delivering research into commercialization. The objectives of this research are to understand research product commercialization, develop a framework, and generate a refined research product commercialization model. An in-depth interview method by purposive sampling was used to gather qualitative data. Interview transcriptions were analyzed through three steps networking processes. Those processes are proposed to generate a research product commercialization framework. The R&D flow and commercialization flow were developed based on that framework. A research product commercialization model was built through gaps and solutions arrangement on commercialization flow. Research and Development- Commercialization bridge (R&D-C Bridge) model was developed based on improved commercialization flow. R&D-C Institute, as an independent institute, runs that model. R&D-C institute also interconnecting stakeholders involved in the technology commercialization process that has already established on the technology park concept. While the Goldsmith and Stage-Gate commercialization model has un-clear tasks division and un-objective commercialization process, the R&D-C bridge model gives a research product commercialization flow through R&D-C institute as a stakeholder hub. It is where the R&D-C bridge model stands on its position. This research offers insights into developing a new research product commercialization model for science and technology park development.

Keywords: A valley of death, commercialization constraints, commercialization model, research product, R&D-C bridge model

Keywords

a valley of death commercialization constraints commercialization model research product R&D-C bridge model

Article Details

How to Cite
Budi, A. A., & Aldianto, L. (2020). Research and Development – Commercialization Bridge: A Refined Model. The Asian Journal of Technology Management (AJTM), 13(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.12695/ajtm.2020.13.1.4

References

    Aithal, P. S., & Aithal, S. (2016). Nanotechnology innovations and commercialization–opportunities, challenges & reasons for delay. International Journal of Engineering and Manufacturing (IJEM), 6(6), 15-25.
    Atikah, N., Al Ghabid, A. H., Sutopo, W., Purwanto, A., & Nizam, M. (2014, November). Technical feasibility for technology commercialization of battery lithium ion. In 2014 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (ICEECS) (pp. 308-314). IEEE.
    Bandarian, R. (2007). Measuring commercial potential of a new technology at the early stage of development with fuzzy logic. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2(4), 73-85.
    Bekhradi, A., Yannou, B., Cluzel, F., Chabbert, F., & Farel, R. (2015, August). In vivo in Situ experimentation projects by innovative cleantech start-ups in Paris. In ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection.
    Clausing, D., & Holmes, M. (2010). Technology readiness. Research-Technology Management, 53(4), 52-59.
    Djunedi, P. (2018). Dana penelitian 2019, sebuah asa baru [Research Fund 2019, a new hope]. Retrieved from https://news.detik.com/kolom/d-4360613/dana-penelitian-2019-sebuah-asa-baru
    Edgett, S. J. (2015). Idea ‐ to ‐ Launch ( Stage ‐ Gate ® ) Model: An Overview. Retrieved from http://media.transformanceadvisors.com/pdfs/Stage-Gate-Model.pdf
    Erdoğmuş, N., & Esen, M. (2011). An investigation of the effects of technology readiness on technology acceptance in e-HRM. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 487-495.
    Frank, C., Sink, C., Mynatt, L., Rogers, R., & Rappazzo, A. (1996). Surviving the “valley of death”: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 21(1-2), 61-69.
    Gibson, D. V., & Conceiçao, P. (2003). Incubating and networking technology commercialization centers among emerging, developing, and mature technopoleis worldwide. In Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.), International Handbook on Innovation (pp. 739–749). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
    Grimaldi, R., & Grandi, A. (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: an assessment of incubating models. Technovation, 25(2), 111-121.
    Hull, L. (n.d.). Subtask 2 (TRL and MRL) (pp. 1–11). Retrieved from http://www.ieadsm.org/publication/subtask-2-overview/
    Jamil, F., Ismail, K., & Mahmood, N. (2015). A review of commercialization tools: University incubators and technology parks. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5(1S), 223-228.
    Kusharsanto, Z. S., & Pradita, L. (2016). The important role of science and technology park towards indonesia as a highly competitive and innovative nation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 227, 545–552.
    Ministry of Higher Education. (2017). Laporan Kinerja 2017 [2017 Performance Report] Ministry of Higher Education, Indonesia.
    Lee, M. C., Chang, T., & Chien, W. T. C. (2011). An approach for developing concept of innovation readiness levels. International Journal of Managing Information Technology (IJMIT), 3(2), 18-37.
    Mankins, J. C. (2009a). Technology readiness assessments: A retrospective. Acta Astronautica, 65(9-10), 1216-1223.
    Mankins, J. C. (2009b). Technology readiness and risk assessments: A new approach. Acta Astronautica, 65(9-10), 1208-1215.
    Nebraska Business Development Center, University of Nebraska Omaha: Goldsmith technology commercial-ization model. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.unomaha.edu/nebraska-business-development-center/technology-commercialization/goldsmith-technology/index.php
    Osawa, Y., & Miyazaki, K. (2006). An empirical analysis of the valley of death: Large‐scale R&D project performance in a Japanese diversified company. Asian journal of technology innovation, 14(2), 93-116.
    Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 99-114.
    Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of service research, 2(4), 307-320.
    Paun, F. (2012). The demand readiness level scale as new proposed tool to hybridise market pull with technology push approaches in technology transfer practices. In Technology Transfer in a Global Economy (pp. 353-366). Springer, Boston, MA.Saunders, M., & Lewis, P. (2012). Doing Research in Business & Management. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
    Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students, (6th ed.). London: Pearson.
    Sauser, B., Ramirez-Marquez, J. E., Magnaye, R., & Tan, W. (2009). A systems approach to expanding the technology readiness level within defense acquisition (No. SIT-AM-09-002). Stevens Inst Of Tech Hoboken Nj School Of Systems And Enterprises.
    Soenarso, W. S., Nugraha, D., & Listyaningrum, E. (2013). Development of Science and Technology Park (STP) in Indonesia to Support Innovation-Based Regional Economy: Concept and Early Stage Development. World Technopolis Review, 2(1), 32-42.
    Sohn, S. Y., & Moon, T. H. (2003). Structural equation model for predicting technology commercialization success index (TCSI). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 70(9), 885-899.
    Stage-Gate International: Stage-Gate Discovery to Launch Process (2019). Retrieved from https://www.stage-gate.com/discovery-to-launch-process/
    Stevens, G. A., & Burley, J. (1997). 3,000 raw ideas= 1 commercial success!. Research-Technology Management, 40(3), 16-27.
    Straub, J. (2015). In search of technology readiness level (TRL) 10. Aerospace Science and Technology, 46, 312-320.
    Tao, L., Probert, D., & Phaal, R. (2010). Towards an integrated framework for managing the process of innovation. R&d Management, 40(1), 19-30.
    Tingkat Kesiapan Teknologi-TKT atau TRL. (2016). Retrieved from http://simlitabmas.ristekdikti.go.id/