Uncovering transfer – a cross-national comparative analysis

Abstract

PurposeSuccessful knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) is necessary to ensure the competitiveness and growth of national innovation systems. In this regard, technology transfer offices (TTOs) are becoming indispensable in their capacity as intermediaries between science, policy, industry, and the public. The purpose of this paper is to examine the strategies and operations of particularly productive transfer offices in five different countries in order to account for the high levels of transfer activity.Design/methodology/approachTo this end, the authors interviewed 34 senior KTT managers in these offices. The collected protocols were analysed in three phases. First, the authors extracted and organised the key characteristics of the transfer practices by applying rigorous method of open-end, qualitative content analysis. The authors then enhanced the thus gathered descriptive statistics and ultimately developed a transfer office typology by building on the concept of attribute space.FindingsThe analysis suggests two ideal types of transfer offices, distinguishable in terms of their intertwined characteristics such as their goals, practices, sources of income, and positions within their associated organisations. While the primarily state-funded common good type would seek benefits to the public, the self-financed entrepreneurial type would pursue commercial success. The former would therefore create opportunities for disseminating knowledge and strengthening the local innovation ecosystem, while the latter would scout for promising ideas and cultivate relationships with industry.Originality/valueThe goal was to uncover the individual characteristics of the offices under study, and the relationships between these characteristics, that can help explain these offices’ exceptional productivity. This study is the first to propose a TTO typology, which can support interorganisational and international transfer collaboration. The findings provide empirical evidence for the theoretical Quadruple Helix model of the innovation system and have implications for research and practice.