University Technology Commercialization Research Articles

Do firms with technological capabilities rush in? Evidence from the timing of licensing of Stanford inventions

This study investigates the influence of licensees’ technological capabilities on the timing of technology licensing in university technology commercialization. Drawing on the appropriation-collaboration tension from the literature on university technology licensing and intellectual property management, we propose that while the licensee’s technological capabilities drive early licensing by averting technological obsolescence, this effect diminishes significantly with an overlap in the technological domain of the focal invention due to expropriation concerns. Cox regression analysis of Stanford University’s invention dataset confirmed our hypotheses. This research reveals that technology licensing experiences delays with the most suitable licensees, namely, those with strong technological capabilities in the knowledge domain of the invention for licensing. This study contributes theoretical insights to the technology market literature and provides practical implications for licensing managers and industry partners in technology commercialization.

Testing the waters: founding team composition and search heuristics in academic entrepreneurial ventures

Abstract Entrepreneurial action often stems from individual judgment about the value potential of market opportunities. Where entrepreneurs direct their search for and evaluate profitable opportunities has long received scholarly consideration. Attention has been increasingly directed toward how search is conducted, with a distinction between “cognitive” search, where actors are driven by a prior belief about the linkage between actions and outcomes (i.e., “learning-before-doing”) and “experiential search,” in which the solution must be realized through experimentation, trial-by-error, or “learning-by-doing.” We examine founders’ experiential search for market applications in uncertain technological environments. In doing so, we seek to uncover how founder background, experience, and depth of knowledge affect the firm’s degree of experiential search. We examine a sample of technology-oriented start-ups founded by researchers from six major US research universities to investigate the role of experiential search in university technology commercialization. In our context of academic entrepreneurship, we find that founding teams that draw from multiple disciplinary perspectives in selecting a market application to pursue exhibit a broader cognitive map of the technological landscape and thus expend more effort in the experiential search process than do teams with less varied backgrounds. Conversely, teams that include individuals with prior commercial experience conduct less experiential search, although this evidence is less strong. The inclusion of students appears to lead to greater experiential search by the founding team. Our findings add new understanding to the application of search heuristics by entrepreneurial firms in technology commercialization.

Academic stars and licensing experience in university technology commercialization

AbstractResearch SummaryWe examine the process by which university technology transfer offices (TTOs) allocate internal resources, which provides insight into technologies offered for commercialization to the private sector. Using detailed administrative records of patenting decisions and outcomes by one prominent U.S. research‐based university's TTO over a 30‐year period, we analyze the performance of invention disclosures by academic stars and by inventors with prior licensing experience. We find that the lead inventor's academic prominence (but not licensing experience) predicts patent application filing, while licensing experience (but not academic prominence) predicts patent impact and commercialization success. We supplement this descriptive analysis with follow‐up interviews and empirical evaluation of possible mechanisms for this seemingly outsized role of academic stars.Managerial SummaryIncreasingly prevalent hybrid organizations are expected to fulfill multiple objectives. University technology transfer offices (TTOs) are an example of a hybrid organization and are charged with disseminating academia‐originated technology for the public good as well as for economic benefit. We study how one TTO allocates internal resources, using comprehensive in‐house administrative data over a 30‐year span. We find that while the TTO tends to put resources behind inventions by academic stars, the commercial returns from licensing inventions from such individuals are no different than inventions by non‐stars. By contrast, inventors' prior licensing experience highly predicts commercial returns. These results illustrate the challenges inherent in internal resource allocation inside a complex hybrid organization.

Discovery sells, but who’s buying? An empirical investigation of entrepreneurs’ technology license decisions

Despite the fundamental role entrepreneurs play in the commercialization of university technology, very little research has focused on their decisions to license. In this study, we conceptualize entrepreneurs’ decisions to license a university technology as a matter of opportunity evaluation and theorize key opportunity attributes entrepreneurs evaluate in deciding whether to pursue or forgo license opportunities. We conduct a conjoint analysis experiment to test our model. Data from 784 decisions made by 98 entrepreneurs revealed that their considerations of prototype maturity, market segment clarity, and regulatory hurdles significantly influence the likelihood of licensing university technology. We further document that technology specific knowledge and active search for a technology license opportunity are key individual difference variables that moderate the effects of some technology attributes. A key finding is that regulatory hurdles, an attribute mostly ignored in prior university technology commercialization research, are instrumental in entrepreneurs’ evaluations.

Commercialize or Not?: A Systematic Literature Review on Academician Desires to Market their Innovation during World COVID-19 Pandemic

This paper aims at investigating the academician behavioral intention on innovation commercialization through a comprehensive analysis of Systematic Literature Review (SLR). During the COVID-19 pandemic era, world economic had faced severe of impact with challengingly. In consequences, the commercialization of innovation outputs could lead significant benefits for nation especially while economic recovery period. One of the main active contributors of new innovation is a researcher among academician. Therefore, human behavior studies are needed to identify the influence factors that affect academicians in developing countries during this world pandemic era. This SLR analysis used three databases namely Scopus, Web of Science and EBSCOhost for selecting articles published starting 2014until 2021. There had 178 articles were identified, only 43 articles were selected as the final set based on the inclusion criteria. Majority of the articles (31/43) were adopted to determine the key drivers of academicians’ intention toward university technology commercialization, whereas the smaller portions of articles (12/43) were conducted meta-analysis among them. Based on the result of SLR, indicated that most often applied key drivers in past studies are personal attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control accordingly. The meta-analysis also found that all these factors gave low effect on academician commercialization intention. A few of recommendations toward university, government and future studies were purposed at the end of paper, which expect to enhance the success of university technology commercialization in Malaysia. © RIGEO ● Review of International Geographical Education

Exploring the role of entrepreneurial passion for facilitating university technology commercialization: Insights from battery research as an interdisciplinary field

University-industry technology commercialization (UTC) from interdisciplinary environments is promising to contribute to solutions for major socio-economic challenges. However, UTC requires considerable coordination and mediation effort and thus intrinsic motivation from the involved researchers. Thus, the objective of the present study is to explore entrepreneurial passion as a means to facilitate researchers’ intrinsic motivation for UTC activities. The interdisciplinary field of battery research is used as a representative environment for the expert interview study. Drawing on qualitative content analysis, a framework is developed, which links researchers’ intrinsic motivation to respective UTC activities, resulting in three distinct UTC-promoting roles. Implications for policy makers seeking to promote UTC, for research managers responsible for the implementation of transfer projects as well as actors from industry who have an interest in collaborative R&D with public research institutions are provided.

00002 Translational Fellows as a mechanism to improve throughput of university technology commercialization

ABSTRACT IMPACT: This work aims to identify best practices for university-based asset development programs to improve commercialization throughput, which in turn will drive innovation in the biomedical space and directly contribute to improved human health. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: University technology transfer exhibits a high rate of failure, often due to a lack of researcher experience or early-stage financial capital. The LEAP program at Washington University (WUSTL) was created to address these needs. The goal of this study is to assess the performance of LEAP against similar gap funds and further improve program operations. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The goals of LEAP are achieved by providing university inventors with individualized consulting and feedback from industry experts, as well as awarding funding to the most promising projects. To determine whether these activities are impactful, we distributed an awardee report form to collect data on all funded LEAP projects, and then combined the results with project registration information. We also collected records Office of Technology Management, including invention disclosures, licenses, and startup creations. The resulting dataset was used to calculate program metrics and then evaluated against comparable gap funds. Sentiment data from participant surveys were also analyzed to assess perceived program value and knowledge transfer. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: As of the Sp2020 cycle, LEAP has funded 76 projects. Resubmitted projects had a funding rate of 52%, vs. 34% for new projects. Of the startups founded off of WUSTL intellectual property since 2016, nearly two-thirds had previously participated in LEAP. Funded LEAP projects also had a 29% licensing rate, which is comparable to similar gap funds. Lastly, participants self-reported an increase in knowledge across a range of commercialization areas. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: The increased repeat funding rate and self-reported knowledge suggest that LEAP is impactful in building commercialization proficiency. The licensing rate and prevalence of LEAP projects in WUSTL startups also indicate that LEAP is indeed promoting tech transfer. Together, these results suggest that LEAP could be a model for other institutions.

Does TTO capability matter in commercializing university technology? Evidence from longitudinal data in South Korea

Does technology transfer office (TTO) capability contribute to university technology commercialization? To answer this question, we identify three distinctive capabilities of technology commercialization—academic research capability, applied research capability, and TTO operation capability—using stochastic frontier analysis. Then, we examine the effects of the three capabilities on university technology commercialization performance measured by both the number and value of technology transfers. Using unique longitudinal data from 2009 to 2015 in South Korea, we find that TTO operation capability does not have a significant effect on university technology commercialization performance, while academic and applied research capabilities have significant and positive effects. TTO operation capability has a positive impact on technology commercialization performance only for universities possessing a high level of applied research capability. Our findings imply that in commercializing university technology, applied research capability enables universities to reconcile different institutional logics of academic and commercial research, and thus universities should have a certain level of applied research capability as a threshold to make TTO operation capability effective. This study extends our understanding of how universities have adapted to the proliferation of commercial research and of when TTOs can play a critical role in enhancing technology commercialization performance.

Nurturing entrepreneurs: How do technology transfer professionals bridge the Valley of Death in Japan?

The study aims to clarify the behavioral patterns of technology transfer professionals (TTPs) required in university technology commercialization. In the past, TTPs simply transferred technology using functional skills and experience gained in specific science/business fields; however, now they are often required to be entrepreneurial in the process, as mentioned in the literature and manuals on the TTP's job. However, we know little about what type of behavioral patterns of entrepreneurship are required for TTPs. Through our explorative case studies of veteran TTPs in Japan, we found concrete behavioral patterns within the theoretical framework of effectuation. TTPs start with the means they can use, try to set temporary goals under high uncertainty, raise technological value using affordable resources, and get stakeholders' involvement. In performing these activities, they take control of emerging situations and iterate several trial-and-error processes to deal with contingencies to accomplish their technology transfer projects. We found that entrepreneurial universities require TTPs who possess not only functional skills but also an understanding of how TTPs act to bridge the Valley of Death.

4328 Translational Fellows as a mechanism to improve throughput of university technology commercialization

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The development of early university technologies for commercialization is largely inefficient and exhibits a high rate of failure, often due to a lack of researcher time and commercialization experience. We have created the Translational Fellow role to address these needs and increase the throughput of university technology transfer. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Translational Fellows will first build their initial competencies to identify, evaluate, and develop new technologies through internships with intake organizations within the university ecosystem, including the Office of Technology Management, the LEAP gap-funding mechanism, and local venture capital firms. Following this training, Fellows will provide tailored support to validated projects by establishing development milestones, liaising with industry experts, navigating regulatory requirements, and drafting marketing materials such as executive summaries and financial projections. Lastly, Fellows will partner with a highly developed project to facilitate the commercialization of the technology, whether through a SBIR/STTR grant, direct licensing event, or startup creation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate that implementation of this mechanism will increase the proportion of university-generated inventions that undergo successful commercialization events, as well as increase the rate at which these projects develop after initial validation. Furthermore, we expect that the skills acquired through this program will allow Fellows to successfully transition to a variety of roles in the biotech space. We also expect that Fellows will be capable of training other scientific teams in the preparation of SBIR/STTR grants, further expanding opportunities for commercialization in the research space. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Translational Fellows fill a unique interdisciplinary niche, allowing them to address common barriers faced by academic inventors. Improving commercialization throughput further capitalizes on the wealth of ideas generated in universities, thereby driving innovation in the biomedical space and directly contributing to improved human health. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESCRIPTION: The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Sustainable Idea Development Mechanism in University Technology Commercialization (UTC): Perspectives from Dynamic Capabilities Framework

Universities pays a lot of attention and investment in the technology commercialization for its sustainable development and social contribution under Korean government-driven policies. However, when compared to US or European universities, the outcomes of the technology commercialization in universities are relatively inactive. Therefore, this study aims to propose a new idea-oriented framework of University-Technology Commercialization (UTC). To achieve this, this study explores the sustainable mechanism from idea to technology commercialization in the volatile environment by employing dynamic capabilities framework. This study employed structural equation modeling (SEM) to identify causal relationships among the variables with a 2014 to 2016 dataset from ‘Higher Education in KOREA’. This study collected national and cross-sectional data from different time periods to design our longitudinal study. Our study examines UTC activities related to sustainable idea development mechanism from dynamic capability framework. The results show the importance of start-up clubs as a first step for idea exploration in university technology commercialization and patents as important for both technology transfers and start-ups. Our findings offer new UTC directions for university policy makers.

Benchmarking U.S. University Technology Commercialization Efforts: A New Approach

Despite the significance of patented university research, it is difficult to measure the economic value of their patented inventions and observe the extent to which universities are able to capture such value through patent licensing. Moving beyond assessing commercialization performance by simple statistics, we propose a new approach to benchmarking university patents and commercialization performance based on comparative corporate patent value. Our procedure involves matching university patents to patents granted to public corporations with similar patent characteristics to estimate the “potential value” of these university patents by the stock market reactions to matched corporate patent grants. We then calibrate an empirical patent valuation model for these estimated values of university patents by employing technology-level licensing data from a leading US research university. In aggregate, we compare the estimated potential values of a university’s patent portfolio to its annual licensing income, and find that universities realize on average 5-9% of the estimated potential value through licensing income. Finally, we investigate the correlates of university-level potential patent value and suggest avenues for future research.

Institutional Approach to Academic Entrepreneurship and University Technology Commercialization

In recent years, high-tech industries that grew out of university- based start-ups or deeply entrenched in academic science have been an important driver of economic growth and life improvement for developed and emerging economies across the globe. Prior literature on academic entrepreneurship and technology commercialization has shown the complexity of the phenomenon and points to factors across macro-, meso-, and micro-levels. This literature, though substantial in volume, lacks overarching theoretical insights that integrate findings from different contexts and mechanisms at different levels. Recent developments from the new institutional theory from organizational sociology provided theoretical tools for this task. In this symposium, we bring together a group of scholars that apply the institutional approach to the study of academic entrepreneurship and technology commercialization, with the aim of providing theoretical insights for this topical area and enriching institutional theories as well. Scaffolds and Intermediaries Presenter: Daniel Erian Armanios; Engineering & Public Policy (EPP), Carnegie Mellon U. Presenter: Charles Eric Eesley; Stanford U. Protecting Scientists from Gordon Gekko Presenter: Markus Perkmann; Imperial College London Presenter: Maureen McKelvey; U. of Gothenburg Presenter: Nelson Phillips; Imperial College London How Prospect of Status Change Affect Licensing of University Technology Overtime in China? Presenter: Xirong Shen; Cornell U. Presenter: Ximing Yin; Tsinghua U. Presenter: Wesley Sine; Cornell U. Do University Entrepreneurship Programs Promote Entrepreneurship? Presenter: Yong Suk Lee; Stanford U. Presenter: Charles Eric Eesley; Stanford U. Distinguishing Between the Roles of Faculty and PhDs in Academic Entrepreneurship Presenter: Michael Roach; Cornell

An Empirical Study on Sustainable Innovation Academic Entrepreneurship Process Model

As academic entrepreneurs, university faculty members and researchers with rich knowledge resources play an important role in the technology commercialization process, and in the creation and development of university spinoff enterprises. In this paper, we used a case study method to construct a sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship process model from the perspective of entrepreneurial behavior. Then, we used this model to provide a deeper understanding of the activities and roles of academic entrepreneurs. This paper also expounded the process of value creation that is a result of sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship, and compared and analyzed three types of university technology commercialization models. Our results showed that in the sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship process model, the motivation of academic entrepreneurs leads them to play multiple roles as academic researchers, enterprise founders, and enterprise managers. In creating enterprises as the founders, and establishing and developing their enterprises, academic entrepreneurs realize the commercial value of the technology, while also incrementing their personal value. The sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship process model provides a new path for effective transfer of technological innovations from academic research to the commercial market, creates social as well as economic value, and promotes regional economic development.

Finding a middle ground

Glenn Vonk used to head Becton Dickinson’s BioVenture Centre in Singapore, where he oversaw new technology development, collaborations with outside partners, and acquisitions. When he returned to the U.S. in 2012, the Ph.D. chemist’s responsibilities included assessing and investing in start-ups whose technologies could be of use to the medical device firm. Vonk’s duties brought him to meetings of the National Council of Entrepreneurial Tech Transfer (NCET2), an association of university technology commercialization officers and large corporations. At these events, upward of 150 university-launched start-ups would pitch their technology to corporate investors. “The universities were unhappy with us,” he recalls. “Often the start-ups were not at all aligned to what I and other corporate investors were interested in doing,” Vonk says. Both the business and the academic folks, he adds, were not making the most productive use of their time. Corporations and universities often don’t see eye to eye. The

A Cochrane Method Systematic Review of University Tech Commercialization Research

Since 1980 universities have been able to commercialize inventions that their faculty researchers create as per the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act (P.L. 96-517). Research universities can now own and license these inventions to small and well established companies. Since 1980, research universities have used tech commercialization to support their regional economies with product development and sales, and academic entrepreneurship resulting in university spinoffs and start-up business formations. This results in job creation. The technology transfer offices (TTOs) which were established at many research universities to manage this process have been studied quite extensively. However, the foundational elements that fuel successful TTO performance has not been studied comprehensively. Instead, there are numerous fragmented studies that date back to the early 1980s. In addition, there is no agreed upon common theory for studying university technology and how these elemental inputs related to performance outputs. Thus, herein it is advocated that the resource-based view (J. Barney, 1991) and theory on environmental munificence (Castrogiovanni, 1991, 2002) be used as a theoretical framework for researching university technology commercialization. Competitive resources in a more munificent environment can make it easier for an organization to survive and prosper.

The university as a venture capitalist? Gap funding instruments for technology transfer

The limited availability of private funding sources to support technology transfer activities represents a major barrier to the effective commercialization of university technologies. This article analyzes the key determinants of the activation of financial instruments by universities—such as seed funds and proof-of-concept programs—to address such funding gaps. Using data from a survey of technology transfer office managers in European universities, we detail the antecedents of the presence of such instruments at the university level and their perceived effectiveness. The findings, in turn, have notable policy implications.

University technology commercialization through new venture projects: an assessment of the French regional incubator program

This article assesses the performance of a technology business incubator program, established by the French government to support innovative new science and technology-based firms (NSTBF) that seek to commercialize laboratory research results. With a resource-based view and an institutional approach, this study predicts why some incubators may be more successful than others in supporting the development of NSTBF. An original longitudinal data set represents the results of a public incubator program, funded following the passage of a 1999 French law on innovation and research. The findings refer to a sample of 25 operationally active incubators and their 1200 graduated new ventures. This study contributes to the literature on business incubation by showing the importance of various incubator resource inputs for aiding NSTBF projects. It thus provides useful and timely feedback for researchers and policy makers.

Instigating entrepreneurship to a university in an adverse entrepreneurial landscape

We offer evidence on how the absence of entrepreneurship shapes the goals and expectations of faculty scientists about university technology commercialization. These results stem from a 2 year program in jump-starting entrepreneurship at the Agricultural University of Athens, a university that operates in a barren entrepreneurial and industrial landscape. We find that the sincere lack of understanding of commercialization and the ensuing superfluous expectations that faculty scientists developed about its benefits, resulted in congestion at the Technology Commercialization Office, rendering the tech-transfer process inefficient. Nevertheless, educating the faculty about entrepreneurship contributed to moderate but tangible short term results.

The evaluation of university inventions: Judging a book by its cover?

This study examines the influence of inventor appearance on how technology licensing officers perceive the commercial potential of new university inventions. An experiment with technology licensing officers at Carnegie I research universities in the United States serves to manipulate inventor appearance in otherwise identical invention disclosures. The experiment reveals that licensing officers perceive inventions by more attractive inventors (inventors with a professional appearance) to have more commercial potential. These findings have several critical implications for university technology commercialization.