In recent years, there have been numerous studies of the effectiveness of university technology transfer. Such technology transfer mechanisms include licensing agreements between the university and private firms, science parks, incubators, and university-based startups. We review and synthesize these papers and present some pointed recommendations on how to enhance effectiveness. Implementation of these recommendations will depend on the mechanisms that universities choose to stress, based on their technology transfer "strategy." For example, institutions that emphasize the entrepreneurial dimension of technology transfer must address skill deficiencies in technology transfer offices, reward systems that are inconsistent with enhanced entrepreneurial activity and the lack of training for faculty members, post-docs, and graduate students in starting new ventures or interacting with entrepreneurs. We conjecture that business schools are best positioned to address these skill and educational deficiencies through the delivery of targeted programs to technology licensing officers and members of the campus community wishing to launch startup firms.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics
номер
0609
тип
Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics
file
:Users/Miguel/Dropbox/Escola/Artigos/Phan, Siegel\_2006\_The Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer Lessons Learned from Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the U.S. and the U.K.pdf:pdf
%0 Unpublished Work
%1 Phan2006
%A Phan, Phillip H.
%A Siegel, Donald S.
%B Technology
%D 2006
%K Academic Kingdom directors,Resources,Review,Social networks,Stages,StandardMetrics,United of spin-offs,Boards
%N 0609
%T The Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer: Lessons Learned from Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the U.S. and the U.K.
%U http://ideas.repec.org/p/rpi/rpiwpe/0609.html
%X In recent years, there have been numerous studies of the effectiveness of university technology transfer. Such technology transfer mechanisms include licensing agreements between the university and private firms, science parks, incubators, and university-based startups. We review and synthesize these papers and present some pointed recommendations on how to enhance effectiveness. Implementation of these recommendations will depend on the mechanisms that universities choose to stress, based on their technology transfer "strategy." For example, institutions that emphasize the entrepreneurial dimension of technology transfer must address skill deficiencies in technology transfer offices, reward systems that are inconsistent with enhanced entrepreneurial activity and the lack of training for faculty members, post-docs, and graduate students in starting new ventures or interacting with entrepreneurs. We conjecture that business schools are best positioned to address these skill and educational deficiencies through the delivery of targeted programs to technology licensing officers and members of the campus community wishing to launch startup firms.
@unpublished{Phan2006,
abstract = {In recent years, there have been numerous studies of the effectiveness of university technology transfer. Such technology transfer mechanisms include licensing agreements between the university and private firms, science parks, incubators, and university-based startups. We review and synthesize these papers and present some pointed recommendations on how to enhance effectiveness. Implementation of these recommendations will depend on the mechanisms that universities choose to stress, based on their technology transfer "strategy." For example, institutions that emphasize the entrepreneurial dimension of technology transfer must address skill deficiencies in technology transfer offices, reward systems that are inconsistent with enhanced entrepreneurial activity and the lack of training for faculty members, post-docs, and graduate students in starting new ventures or interacting with entrepreneurs. We conjecture that business schools are best positioned to address these skill and educational deficiencies through the delivery of targeted programs to technology licensing officers and members of the campus community wishing to launch startup firms.},
added-at = {2012-02-27T06:11:36.000+0100},
author = {Phan, Phillip H. and Siegel, Donald S.},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/29c2c3ab687e04e0faa84498b78107903/kamil205},
booktitle = {Technology},
file = {:Users/Miguel/Dropbox/Escola/Artigos/Phan, Siegel\_2006\_The Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer Lessons Learned from Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the U.S. and the U.K.pdf:pdf},
institution = {Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics},
interhash = {c0c29bd1e634a371823e663bb6988672},
intrahash = {9c2c3ab687e04e0faa84498b78107903},
keywords = {Academic Kingdom directors,Resources,Review,Social networks,Stages,StandardMetrics,United of spin-offs,Boards},
mendeley-tags = {Review,StandardMetrics,United Kingdom},
number = 0609,
timestamp = {2012-02-27T06:12:00.000+0100},
title = {{The Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer: Lessons Learned from Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the U.S. and the U.K.}},
type = {Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics},
url = {http://ideas.repec.org/p/rpi/rpiwpe/0609.html},
year = 2006
}