Commercialization Of University Research Research Articles

University Incubation System for Research Commercialisation: The Case of Taiwan and Malaysia

This article examines the performance of university research commercialisation in Taiwan and Malaysia and specifically discusses the role of incubation intermediaries. Through case study and patent analysis, this article draws lessons from Taiwan and further discusses the mechanisms in place for the successful commercialisation of university research. Lessons from the case offer insights for Malaysia on how university incubation intermediaries can be reorganised to promote better commercialisation outcomes. The Taiwanese experience illustrates that in the right institutional settings—and particularly with the presence of innovative science and technology parks—university incubators tend to promote favourable commercialisation outcomes. More importantly, the ability of university incubators to source for external knowledge and risk capital support positions them to be more effective as intermediaries. Other key success factors include establishing an adequate intellectual property management system and having adequate human resources equipped with intellectual property knowledge. This article further deliberates policy implications.

The Bayh-Dole Act Revisited: The Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Commercialization of University Research

One of the foundational assumptions of patent law is that imbuing inventions with intellectual property rights (IPR) is necessary to bring forth innovation. We test this foundational assumption by examining the impact of IPR on commercialization of university research. Using the full set of US public firms who patented and conducted research over the period 1976 to 2007, we find little evidence that university research protected by IPR had higher commercialization relative to university research in the public domain. Indeed, if anything, university research in the public domain appears to have slightly greater commercialization.

Bridging commercialisation and redevelopment: Jurisdictions and university policy development

Universities, as anchor institutions in regional entrepreneurial ecosystems, have embraced university business incubators (UBIs) as part of broader commercialisation programmes nurturing university spin-offs. Yet, by requiring substantial construction or rededication of physical space, UBIs are also part of land redevelopment initiatives, the goals of which often include reshaping or revitalising surrounding communities’ physical and cultural landscapes. The commercialisation literature often overlooks this redevelopment tool role, leading scholars to over-ascribe UBI structure to university commercialisation cultures. Through a case study of two universities in the same region, the article finds that bioscience UBIs act as bridging activities between university research commercialisation and land redevelopment arms. Divergent adoption patterns reflect distinct legal, political and personal relationships with layered political jurisdictions (i.e. each university’s jurisdictional embeddedness), and point to a divide between public and private universities. The work has direct implications for how regions leverage large, place-based assets for regional entrepreneurial development, but also suggests that universities have outsized roles in local – and not just regional – spatial patterns of economic activity.

The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: a critical review

The literature examining university spin-offs is expanding rapidly. While most studies have examined the antecedents of spin-off creation at universities, the impact of spin-offs commercializing university research cannot be properly assessed without considering how these firms develop, grow, and perform over time. This study provides a systematic review of a recent research stream addressing the development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs. By critically analyzing 105 research papers published since 2000, this paper makes two main contributions. First, we present a conceptual framework outlining the variety of outcomes used in the literature to assess the development, growth and performance of university spin-offs, as well as the determinants of these outcomes at different levels of analysis. Second, we critically assess gaps in the extant literature and discuss promising directions for future research. We conclude that the university spin-off phenomenon provides an excellent empirical context for conducting research that contributes to more general theoretical discussions related to entrepreneurship, innovation and management.

Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding?

There is a paucity of knowledge on research commercialization by university scientists worldwide. The objective of this paper is to identify the role that Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) and direct Industrial Funding play in university research commercialization in transition economies of Azerbaijan, Belarus and Kazakhstan during 2015–2017. We do this by developing a novel database and a multi-level model which explains how individual attributes, organizational and ecosystem characteristics explain the extent of knowledge commercialization.We apply the generalized Heckman approach to account for two selection biases, reducing the sample from 2602 to 272 scientists, and further use a mixed-method approach to analyse 27 face-to-face interviews with researchers and TTO managers. The results demonstrate that research commercialization is not associated with the existence and awareness of TTO or the establishment of commercialization contracts via TTO, but the direct industrial funding of university research. Taken together the findings have clear implications for scholars, scientific entrepreneurs, TTOs and investors who aim to exploit university knowledge in transition economies.

Structural and functional model of commercialization innovative activity results in universities

Innovative activity of universities is a fundamental direction of innovative development of the Russian economy. Universities play the role of innovation centers in regions and industries. The interests of the state, business and the higher school are integrated in the course of creation, development and commercialization of new knowledge. Process of commercialization is continuous as innovative search. It begins along with the beginning of developments. Process of commercialization will begin when the higher education institution has a problem of generation of profit from scientific activity. At the same time various commercializations of forms can be used: as with full alienation of laws of estate of intellectual property, as with maintaining the rights of use of development behind the university. Perspective model of commercialization of university research and development at which the Higher Education Institution remains the owner of the values created in his walls, this creation of the small innovative enterprises. In work results of a research of application of this form are given in the Russian universities. Creation of the small innovative enterprises has a number of positive aspects, both for the university, and for economy of the region and the country in general. Article contains research results of development a transfer infrastructure of higher education institutions technologies to real production. It revealed formation of high innovative capacity of regions. Infrastructure of commercialization of high school research and development is defined as a complex of the interconnected serving departments of higher education institution. They accompany realization of research activity of workers of the university and provide a possibility of commercialization of results of innovative activity. The structurally functional model in which separate elements of innovative infrastructure of the university correspond to a certain form of commercialization and stages of commercialization of innovative activity of higher education institutions is presented in article.

A Pedagogical Framework for Manufacturing Process Design

In recent years, federal economists have argued that manufacturing is a vital part of the U.S. economy, providing a disproportionate share of engineering jobs, research and patents. At the center of these arguments is an understanding that manufacturing research and development is important to the innovation and competitiveness of manufacturing firms. As a result, federal agencies have made significant investments in public-private partnerships stimulating industry-directed research and development on university campuses. At the same time, state and federal agencies have increasingly encouraged the commercialization of university research for regional economic development. Combined, these investments have increased the amount of manufacturing engineering activity at U.S. universities providing opportunities to advance manufacturing engineering practice. This paper discusses efforts at Oregon State University to teach manufacturing process design based on twenty years of findings from efforts to translate microchannel process technology into the marketplace.

Index for volume 45 (2018)

Reviewed by: Robert Stephenson: The Eminent Engineer Andrew Nelson (bio) Robert Stephenson: The Eminent Engineer. Edited by Michael R. Bailey. Aldershot, Hants., and Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2003. Pp. xxvii+401. $99.95. In Robert Stephenson: The Eminent Engineer, Michael Bailey and colleagues have assembled the definitive biography of the nineteenth-century British engineer best known for his contributions to railway construction. For those with a specific interest in Stephenson, the book is an essential resource. But certain themes conveyed vividly through the life and work of [End Page 650] Stephenson position this as an important text for all scholars of engineering history as well. Biographers have paid far more attention to George Stephenson than to his son, Robert. Certainly the interest in George is not misplaced. But the lack of a biography of Robert has been puzzling, given his remarkable and diverse achievements. He was lead engineer for the London and Birmingham, the world's first trunk-line railway, and by 1850 he had been engaged with one-third of all British railway mileage. He made important contributions to water engineering as well. He served as a Member of Parliament. And he displayed a unique ability to balance engineering and business management skills. The chapters in Robert Stephenson each consider a particular slice of his life and work, and are divided into two broad sections: "Influence and Achievement" and "Innovation and Technique." The seven contributors are expert in railroad and engineering history and provide thorough treatments of their respective topics. Indeed, the amount of material collected and the contributing sources are staggering, combed from several archives. At times, the level of detail is nearly overwhelming, giving rise to the book's dilemma: to provide thorough details on Stephenson's many faces while not getting so mired in those very details that larger issues are obscured. Recurring themes highlight those larger issues and underscore the book's broad appeal to scholars of technology and society. Robert Stephenson provides a tour of engineering practice and content in the nineteenth century. It describes the many innovations required to deal with challenges posed by the railway, but goes beyond a simple account of engineering developments to highlight the myriad social influences on Stephenson's engineering practices. A related thread is the high degree of uncertainty surrounding civil engineering, including Stephenson's many cuttings, embankments, tunnels, and retaining walls. The study of soil mechanics was in its infancy. Details such as rail type and track gauge were open questions. In short, the nineteenth century was an era of experimentation and Stephenson was at the center of it. The authors are careful to present him not as an infallible engineering titan but as someone who made numerous mistakes while continually engaged in a learning process. Among the book's important themes is that the practice of engineering is tied intimately to the management of engineering. Indeed, Stephenson is notable not only for his direct contributions to civil engineering but also for his ability to deal with strategic considerations. He had to weigh his involvement in multiple projects against appearances of impropriety and conflicts of interest. He had to balance his strong desire for the orderly development of a national rail network against his loyalty to employers whose projects might violate this ideal. And he had to consider how best to delegate tasks to others, particularly as he took on work overseas. It is through the complexity of these decisions that we begin to appreciate the [End Page 651] interrelationship between Stephenson's life and work on one hand and his social context on the other. Without a doubt this is an exceptional biography. It goes beyond a narrow focus on its subject to provide important insights into nineteenth-century engineering practice and management in general. While the book's intention is not to develop general theory regarding social influences on engineering practice, it may help to do just that. Andrew Nelson Andrew Nelson is a doctoral candidate in management science and engineering at Stanford University. His research interests include the commercialization of university research, music technology, and transportation history. Copyright © 2004 The Society for the History of Technology

University research commercialization in emerging economies: a glimpse into the ‘black box’

University research commercialization in emerging economies: a glimpse into the ‘black box’

AFHVS 2017 presidential address

As efforts to commercialize university research outputs continue, critics charge that universities and university scientists are failing to live up to their public-interest purpose. In this paper, I discuss the distinctions between public-interest and private-interest research institutions and how commercialization of university science may be undermining the public interest. I then use Jurgen Habermas’s concept of communicative action as the foundation for efforts to establish public spaces for ethical deliberation among scientists and university administrators. Such ethical deliberation is necessary to facilitate discussion on whether public-interest science should be the research university’s primary purpose and what institutional rules and resources are needed to honor that purpose.

Managing the accountability–autonomy tensions in university research commercialisation

AbstractThis article investigates organisational responses to emerging concerns about how accountability–autonomy tensions can be managed within the context of university research commercialisation. The findings suggest that changed expectations of university research practices, which result from the introduction of a commercialisation logic, can be managed via the homogenisation of research goals and strategies. The successful management of accountability–autonomy tensions also depends on utilising the various structures and cultural contexts that can be facilitated by decoupling and bridging strategies. Further, while adopting symbolic systems may enhance legitimacy, failure to implement material practices and provide the appropriate cultural context to manage conflicting relationships may put university commercialisation ambitions at risk.

A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change

This article outlines a network approach to the study of technological change. We propose that new inventions reshape networks of interlinked technologies by shifting inventors’ attention to or away from the knowledge on which those inventions build. Using this approach, we develop novel indexes of the extent to which a new invention consolidates or destabilizes existing technology streams. We apply these indexes in analyses of university research commercialization and find that, although federal research funding pushes campuses to create inventions that are more destabilizing, deeper commercial ties lead them to produce technologies that consolidate the status quo. By quantifying the effects that new technologies have on their predecessors, the indexes we propose allow patent-based studies of innovation to capture conceptually important phenomena that are not detectable with established measures. The measurement approach presented here offers empirical insights that support theoretical development in studies of innovation, entrepreneurship, technology strategy, science policy, and social network theory. This paper was accepted by Lee Fleming, entrepreneurship and innovation.

The role of policy in innovation

PurposeContemporary innovation policy investments rests on the assumption that the main problematic interface is the one between the non-business developing setting and a rather friction-free producer and user setting. Given a business landscape characterized by interdependencies, any innovation attempt will be faced with complex interfaces also within and among all these settings. The purpose of this paper is to shed light over this issue through the investigation of the interface between policy and a specific innovation journey. The attention is directed to the creation and distribution of social-material values; and the translation of these values into a monetary dimension.Design/methodology/approachTo fulfill this aim the authors utilize an empirical study on the commercialization of university research results in the field of solar power technology, based on the ARA model as a conceptual and methodological foundation, with a focus on the establishment of resource combinations, activity links and actor bonds in the involved developing, producing and using settings. In order to pin-point the creation of social-material values and the establishment of a monetary dimension the authors used a model adapted from Håkansson and Olsen (2015).FindingsFrom a national policy perspective, the transnational nature of innovation processes and the connectedness of resources across different, often far-away places, entail a loss of control on the social-material and monetary benefits of innovation; even more so if the policy of one country stands against that of another country. Still, not only policy but also representatives for academic research and business seem to consider the transnational aspect as an exception.Research limitations/implicationsDue to that the embedding in the user setting did not occur as expected; with the Swedish focal firm as main interface, but from a Chinese firm that the authors did not have access to, the main focus is on the developing and the producing setting, while the embedding in the user setting is covered through indirect information.Practical implicationsThe role that established production structures have for the embedding of innovations into producing and using settings seems to be neglected in policy circles – although these have a strong impact on the creation of social-material value and a monetary flow.Social implicationsSee practical implication.Originality/valueThe paper underlines the impact of interfaces with established production structures for the creation of social-material value and monetary flow – and for transnational dimension of the innovation journey.

Accelerating the technological life cycle through convergence: trends from herbal medicine patents and insights from case studies in Asia Pacific

Research and innovation play a major part in affecting technological convergence, which in turn plays a key role in the advancement of the technological life cycle. In this paper, we present an evolutionary perspective of how patent keyword clusters evolve in different phases of the technological life cycle of the herbal medicine sector. We map the trajectory of the technological life cycle and correlate this with snapshots of patent cluster landscapes. Evidence of convergence of modern biotechnological methods with existing herbal medicine innovations was observed, which leads to the strengthening of patent clusters and penetration of herbal medicine into novel niches. The emergence of universities is also discussed as significant latecomers in patenting activities, which is evidence of a long incubation period for the commercialisation of university research in herbal medicine. We propose this methodology as a means to gauge the trajectory and anticipate revolutions in the technology life cycle of the herbal medicine industry, in order to study innovation patterns and facilitate convergence in the long run.

Exploring Diverse Effects of Four Types of Mobility on University Entrepreneurship

<span>This study explores the mechanism by which mobility influences university entrepreneurship through an empirical analysis of Japanese scientists working for the University of Tokyo. It presents theory-driven typology of mobility and applies it to the knowledge-transfer context. First, this paper subdivides previously-studied mobility into four types – job mobility (JM), sector mobility (SM), international mobility (IM), and the educational background mobility (EBM). Then, it empirically shows that both JM and IM have positive and significant correlation with university entrepreneurship, whereas neither SM nor EBM does. Based on the result, this study discusses that JM and IM accelerate the formation of skills necessary for the commercialization of university research; however, SM and EBM may have no impact on it.</span>

ROLE OF ENTREPRENEURIAL LEADERSHIP AND COMMERCIALIZATION OF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH: A REVIEW

Recently, universities are playing active role in economic development of the country, besides their traditional role of teaching and research. Research has shown that the increasing global trend of entrepreneurial activities emerging in major academic institutions have left universities with no choice but to re-invent their operational activities and engage themselves in entrepreneurial activities to remain competitive globally. However this transformation required entrepreneurial leadership that can lead universities to enhance the commercialization of their research. Thus, in this regard, entrepreneurial leadership is inevitable for universities. Current study provided the review of literature which argues the need for entrepreneurial leadership in the context of commercialization of university research.

A Multi-Country, Process-Based Approach to Academic Entrepreneurship

Academic entrepreneurship is a hot topic that is drawing increasing attention from policymakers, university administrators, and the scientists who engage in it. By adopting a process view of academic entrepreneurship, in this book, we aim to contribute to the conversation on how to effectively commercialize university research. We collect evidence from twelve countries and three continents. We use both qualitative and quantitative research methods to illuminate how and to what extent entrepreneurship unfolds from universities worldwide.

The commercialization of university-based research: Balancing risks and benefits.

BackgroundThe increasing push to commercialize university research has emerged as a significant science policy challenge. While the socio-economic benefits of increased and rapid research commercialization are often emphasized in policy statements and discussions, there is less mention or discussion of potential risks. In this paper, we highlight such potential risks and call for a more balanced assessment of the commercialization ethos and trends.DiscussionThere is growing evidence that the pressure to commercialize is directly or indirectly associated with adverse impacts on the research environment, science hype, premature implementation or translation of research results, loss of public trust in the university research enterprise, research policy conflicts and confusion, and damage to the long-term contributions of university research.SummaryThe growing emphasis on commercialization of university research may be exerting unfounded pressure on researchers and misrepresenting scientific research realities, prospects and outcomes. While more research is needed to verify the potential risks outlined in this paper, policy discussions should, at a minimum, acknowledge them.

Building University Innovation Ecosystems: The Role of Work Integrated Learning as a Core Element in the UniversityIndustry Nexus

Universities can be seen as innovation ecosystems contributing towards national innovation capacity via the commercialization of university research. While existing research predominantly focuses on university staff activities related to industry, the critical role of the student in contributing towards innovation efforts have often been overlooked and should be leveraged further as it is an important impetus for broader innovation outcomes. Students can contribute to innovation outcomes through various work integrated learning activities such as industry placements and work based projects. Therefore, by focusing on the student, the objective of the research is to develop a model for building effective university innovation ecosystems through work integrated learning as a nexus between university and industry. It provides important implications for university innovation policies and management frameworks to build university innovation ecosystems.

Inventions for Industry. Canadian Patents and Development Limited and the Commercialization of University Research in Canada

From 1948 to 1991, Canadian Patents and Development Limited (CPDL) managed the commercialization of inventions and discoveries arising from government departments and agencies, as well as those disclosed to it by universities and others publicly funded organizations. The existence of CPDL, however, is rarely recognized in scholarship and discussions of Canadian science, technology, and innovation; its history is largely unobserved. This paper introduces a history of CPDL into the literature and contributes to a more complete understanding of the history of technology transfer in Canada. In so doing, this paper may help those interested in research commercialization understand the dynamics affecting technology transfer intermediary organizations and government policy instruments promoting the patenting and licensing of publicly funded research.