How institutional nature and available resources determine the performance of technology transfer offices

被引:20
作者
Cartaxo, Rui M. [1 ]
Godinho, Manuel Mira [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lisbon, ISEG Lisbon Sch Econ & Management, Lisbon, Portugal
[2] UECE, Res Unit Complex & Econ, Lisbon, Portugal
关键词
Technology transfer; university-industry relationships; university patenting; university spin-offs; UNIVERSITY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE; STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT; COMMERCIALIZATION; CREATION; PATENTS; SCIENCE; CAPABILITIES; INVENTIONS; GROWTH;
D O I
10.1080/13662716.2016.1264068
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper assesses the performance of GAPIs and OTICs, two different types of university technology transfer offices that have been active in Portuguese higher education institutions, since 2000 and 2006, respectively. Data originating from a survey of these offices were analysed through both cluster analysis and the estimation of a Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) model. Results show that the institutional nature of each of the surveyed organisations implies different behaviours and outputs. Furthermore, it is shown that the resources and activities of the surveyed offices determine their performance concurrently with regard to technology transfer, licencing contracts and technology-based spin-offs. The results of this study may be particularly relevant for countries that are in the process of developing their university technology transfer activities, as they can help to shape policies in relation to TTOs' funding and resource allocation during the earlier stages of these activities.
引用
收藏
页码:713 / 734
页数:22
相关论文
共 56 条
[41]   THE CORNERSTONES OF COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE - A RESOURCE-BASED VIEW [J].
PETERAF, MA .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 1993, 14 (03) :179-191
[42]   University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: a resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship [J].
Powers, JB ;
McDougall, PP .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS VENTURING, 2005, 20 (03) :291-311
[43]  
Pressman L., 1995, Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, V7, P49
[44]   Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT [J].
Shane, S .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2002, 48 (01) :122-137
[45]   ASSESSING THE RELATIVE PERFORMANCE OF UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER IN THE US AND UK: A STOCHASTIC DISTANCE FUNCTION APPROACH [J].
Siegel, Donald ;
Wright, Mike ;
Chapple, Wendy ;
Lockett, Andy .
ECONOMICS OF INNOVATION AND NEW TECHNOLOGY, 2008, 17 (7-8) :717-729
[46]   Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications [J].
Siegel, Donald S. ;
Veugelers, Reinhilde ;
Wright, Mike .
OXFORD REVIEW OF ECONOMIC POLICY, 2007, 23 (04) :640-660
[47]   Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies [J].
Siegel, DS ;
Waldman, DA ;
Atwater, LE ;
Link, AN .
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 2004, 21 (1-2) :115-142
[48]   Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study [J].
Siegel, DS ;
Waldman, D ;
Link, A .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2003, 32 (01) :27-48
[49]  
Teece DJ, 1997, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V18, P509, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO
[50]  
2-Z