IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v35y2010i6p637-650.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Grimpe
  • Heide Fier

Abstract

Existing literature has confined university technology transfer almost exclusively to formal mechanisms, like patents, licenses or royalty agreements. Relatively little is known about informal technology transfer that is based upon interactions between university scientists and industry personnel. Moreover, most studies are limited to the United States, where the Bay-Dole-Act has shaped the institutional environment since 1980. In this paper, we provide a comparative study between the United States and Germany where the equivalent of the Bay-Dole-Act has come into force only in 2002. Based on a sample of more than 800 university scientists, our results show similar relationships for the United States and Germany. Faculty quality which is however based on patent applications rather than publications serves as a major predictor for informal technology transfer activities. Hence, unless universities change their incentives (e.g., patenting as one criterion for promotion and tenure) knowledge will continue to flow out the backdoor.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Grimpe & Heide Fier, 2010. "Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 637-650, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:35:y:2010:i:6:p:637-650
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-009-9140-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-009-9140-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-009-9140-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    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. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    3. Murray, Fiona, 2004. "The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 643-659, May.
    4. 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.
    5. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Glänzel, Wolfgang & Hussinger, Katrin, 2009. "Heterogeneity of patenting activity and its implications for scientific research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 26-34, February.
    6. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    7. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    8. Thursby, Jerry & Fuller, Anne W. & Thursby, Marie, 2009. "US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 14-25, February.
    9. Etzkowitz, Henry, 2003. "Research groups as 'quasi-firms': the invention of the entrepreneurial university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 109-121, January.
    10. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    11. Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
    12. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2011. "Commercializing academic research: the quality of faculty patenting," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(5), pages 1403-1437, October.
    13. Albert N. Link, 2007. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Technological Change," Technical Reports 070716, Brandmeyer Center for Applied Economics, School of Business, University of Kansas.
    14. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    15. Maryann Feldman & Irwin Feller & Janet Bercovitz & Richard Burton, 2002. "Equity and the Technology Transfer Strategies of American Research Universities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 105-121, January.
    16. Grimpe, Christoph & Hussinger, Katrin, 2008. "Formal and Informal Technology Transfer from Academia to Industry: Complementarity Effects and Innovation Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-080, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Dirk Czarnitzki & Wolfgang Glänzel & Katrin Hussinger, 2007. "Patent and publication activities of German professors: an empirical assessment of their co-activity," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 311-319, December.
    18. Albert Link & Donald Siegel, 2005. "Generating science-based growth: an econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university-industry technology transfer," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 169-181.
    19. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Royalty Sharing and Technology Licensing in Universities," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 252-264, 04/05.
    20. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2002. "Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 90-104, January.
    21. Albert N. Link & Donald S. Siegel & Barry Bozeman, 2007. "An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 641-655, August.
    22. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Edler, Jakob & Fier, Heide & Grimpe, Christoph, 2011. "International scientist mobility and the locus of knowledge and technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 791-805, July.
    2. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    3. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2012. "The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 755-776, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Grimpe, Christoph & Hussinger, Katrin, 2008. "Formal and Informal Technology Transfer from Academia to Industry: Complementarity Effects and Innovation Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-080, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Landry, Réjean & Saïhi, Malek & Amara, Nabil & Ouimet, Mathieu, 2010. "Evidence on how academics manage their portfolio of knowledge transfer activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1387-1403, December.
    7. Aschhoff, Birgit & Grimpe, Christoph, 2014. "Contemporaneous peer effects, career age and the industry involvement of academics in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 367-381.
    8. Annelore Huyghe & Mirjam Knockaert & Evila Piva & Mike Wright, 2016. "Are researchers deliberately bypassing the technology transfer office? An analysis of TTO awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 589-607, October.
    9. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    10. repec:wip:wpaper:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Pluvia Zuniga, 2011. "The State of Patenting at Research Institutions in Developing Countries: Policy Approaches and Practices," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 04, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, revised Dec 2011.
    12. Dirk Czarnitzki & Christian Rammer & Andrew Toole, 2014. "University spin-offs and the “performance premium”," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 309-326, August.
    13. 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.
    14. Toole, Andrew A. & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2007. "Life Scientist Mobility from Academe to Industry: Does Academic Entrepreneurship Induce a Costly ?Brain Drain? on the Not-for-Profit Research Sector?," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-072, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2015. "The Ownership of Academic Patents and Their Impact. Evidence from Five European Countries," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(1), pages 143-171.
    16. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén & Christoph Grimpe, 2017. "Who instigates university–industry collaborations? University scientists versus firm employees," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 503-524, March.
    17. Andrew A. Toole & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2010. "Commercializing Science: Is There a University "Brain Drain" from Academic Entrepreneurship?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1599-1614, September.
    18. Véronique Schaeffer & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Julien Pénin, 2020. "The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 31-55, February.
    19. 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.
    20. Francesco Lissoni, 2013. "Intellectual property and university–industry technology transfer," Chapters, in: Faïz Gallouj & Luis Rubalcaba & Paul Windrum (ed.), Public–Private Innovation Networks in Services, chapter 7, pages 164-194, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. Aldo Geuna & Alessandro Muscio, 2008. "The governance of University knowledge transfer," SPRU Working Paper Series 173, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Informal university technology transfer; Cross-country comparison; J61; O33;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J61 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Geographic Labor Mobility; Immigrant Workers
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:jtecht:v:35:y:2010:i:6:p:637-650. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.