IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i9p1588-d228739.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Can We Improve the Transformation Success Rate of Research Results in the Pharmaceutical Industry? The Game Theoretic Model of Technology Transfer Subjects

Author

Listed:
  • Ziyuan Sun

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Man Wang

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Weiwei Zhang

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Yanli Li

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Dan Wang

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Feng Dong

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

Abstract

University–industry technology transfer (UITT) plays an important role in the construction of the national pharmaceutical innovation system. The speculations of a faculty inventor may hinder the successful transfer of pharmaceutical research results. This paper divides the specific process of the transformation of pharmaceutical research results into two parts: (1) an evolutionary game between faculty inventors and universities; and (2) a Stackelberg game between faculty inventors and pharmaceutical companies. Further, we carry out numerical simulations to analyze the impact of transformation success rate, income distribution coefficient, and a faculty inventor’s future working years on the transformation of pharmaceutical research results. The findings indicated that whether a combination of action strategies of faculty inventors and universities can evolve to the optimal equilibrium is determined by many factors, such as the technological transaction price of the pharmaceutical company and the reward or the income obtained by the faculty inventor. The transformation success rate and the income distribution coefficient are the key factors that affect the faculty inventor’s will and the behavior of the pharmaceutical company. The conclusions of this paper contribute to the research on how we can improve the success rate of research results and avoid resource waste, and provide a decision-making reference for the management of pharmaceutical research results in universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziyuan Sun & Man Wang & Weiwei Zhang & Yanli Li & Dan Wang & Feng Dong, 2019. "How Can We Improve the Transformation Success Rate of Research Results in the Pharmaceutical Industry? The Game Theoretic Model of Technology Transfer Subjects," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-30, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:9:p:1588-:d:228739
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/9/1588/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/9/1588/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friedman, Joseph & Silberman, Jonathan, 2003. "University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 17-30, January.
    2. Patrick S. W. Fong & Xuhua Chang & Qiang Chen, 2018. "Faculty patent assignment in the Chinese mainland: evidence from the top 35 patent application universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 69-95, February.
    3. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    4. Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2010. "Incentives in university technology transfers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 362-367, July.
    5. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    6. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    7. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2004. "Are Faculty Critical? Their Role in University–Industry Licensing," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(2), pages 162-178, April.
    8. Michelle Marie Lockhart & Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar & Christopher Carswell & Sanjay Garg, 2013. "New Zealand’s Drug Development Industry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
    9. Berbegal-Mirabent, Jasmina & Sánchez García, José Luís & Ribeiro-Soriano, D. Enrique, 2015. "University–industry partnerships for the provision of R&D services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1407-1413.
    10. Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria & Geuna, Aldo & Rossi, Federica, 2013. "Finding the right partners: Institutional and personal modes of governance of university–industry interactions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 50-62.
    11. Joshua B. Powers, 2003. "Commercializing Academic Research," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(1), pages 26-50, January.
    12. Luc Anselin & Attila Varga & Zoltan Acs, 2008. "Local Geographic Spillovers Between University Research and High Technology Innovations," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 9, pages 95-121, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Henry Etzkowitz & Loet Leydesdorff, 1997. "Introduction to special issue on science policy dimensions of the Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 2-5, February.
    14. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W, 2001. "To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 99-114, January.
    15. Bania, Neil & Eberts, Randall W & Fogarty, Michael S, 1993. "Universities and the Startup of New Companies: Can We Generalize from Route 128 and Silicon Valley?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(4), pages 761-766, November.
    16. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
    17. Jeannette Colyvas & Michael Crow & Annetine Gelijns & Roberto Mazzoleni & Richard R. Nelson & Nathan Rosenberg & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2002. "How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 61-72, January.
    18. Elsadany, A.A., 2017. "Dynamics of a Cournot duopoly game with bounded rationality based on relative profit maximization," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 294(C), pages 253-263.
    19. Dechenaux, Emmanuel & Thursby, Jerry & Thursby, Marie, 2011. "Inventor moral hazard in university licensing: The role of contracts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 94-104, February.
    20. Geuna, Aldo & Nesta, Lionel J.J., 2006. "University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 790-807, July.
    21. Qinghua Huang & Xiding Chen & Mi Zhou & Xiaoqin Zhang & Lingling Duan, 2019. "How Does CEO’s Environmental Awareness Affect Technological Innovation?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-16, January.
    22. Lai, Wen-Hsiang, 2011. "Willingness-to-engage in technology transfer in industry–university collaborations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(11), pages 1218-1223.
    23. Markman, Gideon D. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B. & Gianiodis, Peter T., 2005. "Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 241-263, March.
    24. De Castro, Luciano & Yannelis, Nicholas C., 2018. "Uncertainty, efficiency and incentive compatibility: Ambiguity solves the conflict between efficiency and incentive compatibility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 678-707.
    25. O'Shea, Rory P. & Allen, Thomas J. & Chevalier, Arnaud & Roche, Frank, 2005. "Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 994-1009, September.
    26. Battaglia, Daniele & Landoni, Paolo & Rizzitelli, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational structures for external growth of University Technology Transfer Offices: An explorative analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 45-56.
    27. MacNeil, Maggie & Koch, Melissa & Kuspinar, Ayse & Juzwishin, Don & Lehoux, Pascale & Stolee, Paul, 2019. "Enabling health technology innovation in Canada: Barriers and facilitators in policy and regulatory processes," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 203-214.
    28. Chau, Vinh Sum & Gilman, Mark & Serbanica, Cristina, 2017. "Aligning university–industry interactions: The role of boundary spanning in intellectual capital transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 199-209.
    29. Marie Thursby & Richard Jensen, 2001. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 240-259, March.
    30. Todd Cherry & David McEvoy, 2013. "Enforcing Compliance with Environmental Agreements in the Absence of Strong Institutions: An Experimental Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 63-77, January.
    31. Wai Fong Boh & Uzi De-Haan & Robert Strom, 2016. "University technology transfer through entrepreneurship: faculty and students in spinoffs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 661-669, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karol Śledzik & Renata Płoska & Mariusz Chmielewski & Adam Barembruch & Agnieszka Szmelter-Jarosz & Angelika Kędzierska-Szczepaniak & Paweł Antonowicz, 2023. "Multivariate Pharma Technology Transfer Analysis: Civilization Diseases and COVID-19 Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-17, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2016. "Determinants Of Financial Rewards From Industry–University Collaboration In South Korea," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(07), pages 1-26, October.
    2. Soares, Thiago J. & Torkomian, Ana L.V., 2021. "TTO's staff and technology transfer: Examining the effect of employees' individual capabilities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Christopher S. Hayter & Andrew J. Nelson & Stephanie Zayed & Alan C. O’Connor, 2018. "Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1039-1082, August.
    4. Hsu, David W.L. & Shen, Yung-Chi & Yuan, Benjamin J.C. & Chou, Chiyan James, 2015. "Toward successful commercialization of university technology: Performance drivers of university technology transfer in Taiwan," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 25-39.
    5. Bradley, Samantha R. & Hayter, Christopher S. & Link, Albert N., 2013. "Models and Methods of University Technology Transfer," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-10, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    6. Yung-Chi Shen, 2017. "Identifying the key barriers and their interrelationships impeding the university technology transfer in Taiwan: a multi-stakeholder perspective," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2865-2884, November.
    7. Annelore Huyghe & Mirjam Knockaert, 2015. "The influence of organizational culture and climate on entrepreneurial intentions among research scientists," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 138-160, February.
    8. Samantha Bradley & Christopher Hayter & Albert Link, 2013. "Proof of Concept Centers in the United States: an exploratory look," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 349-381, August.
    9. Abreu, Maria & Grinevich, Vadim, 2013. "The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 408-422.
    10. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    11. Giuri, Paola & Munari, Federico & Scandura, Alessandra & Toschi, Laura, 2019. "The strategic orientation of universities in knowledge transfer activities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 261-278.
    12. Alessandra Micozzi & Donato Iacobucci & Irene Martelli & Andrea Piccaluga, 2021. "Engines need transmission belts: the importance of people in technology transfer offices," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1551-1583, October.
    13. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2016. "Knowledge Creates Markets: The influence of entrepreneurial support and patent rights on academic entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 131-146.
    14. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2011. "Does inventor ownership encourage university research-derived entrepreneurship? A six university comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1100-1112, October.
    15. Anja Schoen & Bruno Pottelsberghe de la Potterie & Joachim Henkel, 2014. "Governance typology of universities’ technology transfer processes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 435-453, June.
    16. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    17. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    18. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    19. Brantnell, Anders & Baraldi, Enrico, 2022. "Understanding the roles and involvement of technology transfer offices in the commercialization of university research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Rossi, Federica & Fassio,Claudio & Geuna, Aldo, 2014. "The Role of Institutional Characteristics in Knowledge Transfer: A Comparative Analysis of Two Italian Universities," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201410, University of Turin.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:9:p:1588-:d:228739. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.