Study note on technology transfer office

Study note on technology transfer office

References with extracted contents

Fitzgerald, C. and J.A. Cunningham. 2014. "Inside the university technology transfer office: mission statement analysis" Journal of Technology Transfer 41, Springer: 1235-1246.

"The services of a university technology transfer office (TTO) are being demanded, as well as being scrutinized, by a myriad of stakeholders. Understanding and defining the purpose and intent of a TTO is not a simple task; it requires a multi-linear if not a multi-typological approach (Montesinos et al. 2008). At the early stages of establishing TTOs defining a clear purpose is critical to establish legitimacy and credibility. Yet, it is a critical task as universities pursue technology transfer activities and seek to acknowledge it through carefully articulated mission statements.";

"TTOs core drivers center on the knowledge economy, levels of public funding, and industry pressures. However, the challenge that remains for TTOs is understanding that there is overlap in between the three core purposes of mission statements—a tool for decision making, communications, and strategic planning—and therefore giving careful consideration to points of differentiation (Jongbloed et al. 2008), which thus define the unique characteristics of the TTO and hence its ability for efficiency and effectiveness";

"Prior to the establishment of TTOs, the initial organizational units in Irish universities responsible for technology transfer mission activities were Industrial Liaison Offices (ILO). These were set up in four of the Irish universities and they were one man-shops, where one person was responsible for a multitude of activities related to industry engagement, student placements, and organizational contracts. ILOs had a wide ranging institutional roles and remits";

Algieri, B., A. Aquino and M. Succuro. 2013. "Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: the case of Italy" Journal of Technology Transfer 38, Springer: 382-400.

"Technology transfer, i.e., a transfer of knowledge from universities to industry, has gained considerable attention in recent years because knowledge produced in universities can spur business innovation, foster competitiveness, and promote economic and social development. Over the past decade, there has been increasing political pressure in many European countries to transfer research findings to the market and to strengthen the linkage among universities, industries and governments. In this context, several European universities have added a new mission to their agenda. In addition to the traditional teaching and research activities, they are pursuing a higher interaction with society by bringing research results to business. This novel mission and the increased integration between researchers and industry have led to the term ‘‘entrepreneurial university’’...";

"In order to diffuse an entrepreneurial culture of research, encourage the dissemination of scientific outcomes and support scientists through the stages of commercialisation of the results of their study, several universities have established technology transfer offices (TTOs). The first TTOs were set up in the US, as a consequence of the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980. The act gave universities that conducted federally funded research the right to take title to any resulting patents as long as they were willing to patent and commercialise them";

"Historically universities have transferred technology using classical methods such as publications, student education, conferences, and workshops. Technology transfer through intellectual properties, licensing, patenting, the creation of start-up companies, business incubators, and technological parks added a new educative dimension and offered additional research opportunities for academicians and students (COGR 2000). Therefore, technology transfer offices have been included in the university organisational structure or have been established as an independent structure outside a university, but operating in its name, in order to facilitate the passage of knowledge and know-how from academia to business";

Siegel, D.S., D. Waldman and A. Link. 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study" Research Policy 32, Elsevier: 27-48.

"Universities in the United States have been criticized in some circles for being more adept at developing new technologies than moving them into private sector applications. This is potentially problematic since success in university/industry technology transfer (UITT) could be a critical factor in sustaining the global competitiveness of US firms. Some federal agencies have responded to this concern by providing incentives for universities to form partnerships with firms. Expectations regarding a quicker commercial “payoff” to basic research have risen accordingly. To build political support for their institutions, university leaders frequently cite the role of technology transfer in stimulating local economic development. Facing tighter budgets, these administrators often promise to deliver more “bang for the buck” in technology transfer";

"TTOs facilitate technological diffusion through the licensing to industry of inventions or intellectual property resulting from university research.3 Many institutions established a TTO in the aftermath of the University and Small Business Patent Procedures Act of 1980, otherwise known as the Bayh–Dole Act. Bayh–Dole dramatically changed incentives for firms and universities to engage in UITT [university/industry technology transfer] . It simplified the UITT process by instituting a uniform patent policy and removing many restrictions on licensing. Furthermore, it allowed universities to own the patents that arise from federal research grants";

"TTO personnel must devote some effort to encouraging faculty members to disclose inventions. Once the invention is formally disclosed, the TTO simultaneously evaluates the commercial potential of the technology and decides whether to patent the innovation. Often, interest in the technology by an industry partner provides sufficient justification for filing a patent. In other instances, the TTO must make these judgements before industry expresses an interest in the technology";