IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v40y2015i6p1034-1049.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the performance of university technology transfer using meta data approach: the case of Dutch universities

Author

Listed:
  • Tsvi Vinig
  • David Lips

Abstract

The objective o this study is to empirically measure the performance of Dutch university’s technology transfer. Dutch universities are ranked high on research output but there is scarce evidence about the commercialization of research-based innovation. We present a novel approach to measure the performance of university technology transfer using meta data analysis. We use data on research output as meta-data to estimates the potential for technology transfer, and data about the actual technology transfer projects as measured by patents, license agreements and spin-offs. We tested our model for Dutch universities and validated it using data from private and state universities in the US. Our results suggest that most Dutch research universities have poor performance while technical Dutch universities and academic medical center perform well. We pilot-tested our model for selected US universities and the result confirm the validity of our approach. Our approach contributes to the literature on university technology transfer by adding a novel approach for measuring performance of university technology transfer while taking into account university research as the potential for technology transfer. Copyright The Author(s) 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Tsvi Vinig & David Lips, 2015. "Measuring the performance of university technology transfer using meta data approach: the case of Dutch universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1034-1049, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:40:y:2015:i:6:p:1034-1049
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-014-9389-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-014-9389-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-014-9389-0?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goldfarb, Brent & Henrekson, Magnus, 2003. "Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 639-658, April.
    2. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2005. "Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of U.S. university spin-off companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1106-1112, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Morgan, Robert P & Kruytbosch, Carlos & Kannankutty, Nirmala, 2001. "Patenting and Invention Activity of U.S. Scientists and Engineers in the Academic Sector: Comparisons with Industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 173-183, January.
    5. Donald S. Siegel & Reinhilde Veugelers & Mike Wright, 2007. "Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 640-660, Winter.
    6. Di Gregorio, Dante & Shane, Scott, 2003. "Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 209-227, February.
    7. repec:reg:rpubli:449 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
    10. Nicola Baldini, 2006. "University patenting and licensing activity: a review of the literature," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 197-207, December.
    11. Ann-Charlotte Fridh & Bo Carlsson, 2002. "special issue: Technology transfer in United States universities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 199-232.
    12. Bray, Michael J. & Lee, James N., 2000. "University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 385-392.
    13. Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright & Andy Lockett, 2007. "The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 489-504, 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. V.G.R. Chandran & Mohammad Nourani & Sonia Kumari Selvarajan & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Selective research funding policy and catching up the ladder in university research performance in Malaysia," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 539-550, April.
    2. Jasmine Meysman & Sven H. Cleyn & Johan Braet, 2019. "Cash, community and coordination: the triple-C categorisation of technology transfer office organisational philosophy," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 815-835, September.
    3. Esteban Lafuente & Jasmina Berbegal-Mirabent, 2019. "Assessing the productivity of technology transfer offices: an analysis of the relevance of aspiration performance and portfolio complexity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 778-801, June.
    4. Vidita Choudhry & Todd A. Ponzio, 2020. "Modernizing federal technology transfer metrics," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 544-559, April.
    5. Francisco-Isidoro Vega-Gomez & F. Javier Miranda & Antonio Chamorro Mera & Jesús Pérez Mayo, 2018. "The Spin-Off as an Instrument of Sustainable Development: Incentives for Creating an Academic USO," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-15, November.
    6. Noack, Anika & Jacobsen, Heike, 2021. "Transfer scouts: from intermediation to co-constructors of new knowledge and technologies in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    7. Insu Cho & Young Hoon Kwak & Jaehyeon Jun, 2019. "Sustainable Idea Development Mechanism in University Technology Commercialization (UTC): Perspectives from Dynamic Capabilities Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Son, Hosung & Chung, Yanghon & Hwang, Heeju, 2019. "Do technology entrepreneurship and external relationships always promote technology transfer? Evidence from Korean public research organizations," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 1-15.
    9. Laura Kreiling & Ahmed Bounfour, 2020. "A practice-based maturity model for holistic TTO performance management: development and initial use," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1718-1747, December.
    10. Fernando Almeida, 2021. "Systematic Review On Academic Entrepreneurship Indicators," Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Economics, SOUTH-WEST UNIVERSITY "NEOFIT RILSKI", BLAGOEVGRAD, vol. 9(2), pages 7-22.
    11. Kadigia Faccin & Christle Beer & Bibiana Volkmer Martins & Grabriela Zanandrea & Neta Kela & Corne Schutte, 2022. "What really matters for TTOs efficiency? An analysis of TTOs in developed and developing economies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1135-1161, August.
    12. Odysseas Cartalos & Stelios Rozakis & Dominiki Tsiouki, 2018. "A method to assess and support exploitation projects of university researchers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 986-1006, August.
    13. David A. Kirby & Hala H. El Hadidi, 2019. "University technology transfer efficiency in a factor driven economy: the need for a coherent policy in Egypt," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1367-1395, October.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    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. Giuliano Sansone & Daniele Battaglia & Paolo Landoni & Emilio Paolucci, 2021. "Academic spinoffs: the role of entrepreneurship education," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 369-399, March.
    5. 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).
    6. Son, Hosung & Chung, Yanghon & Hwang, Heeju, 2019. "Do technology entrepreneurship and external relationships always promote technology transfer? Evidence from Korean public research organizations," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 1-15.
    7. 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.
    8. Insu Cho & Young Hoon Kwak & Jaehyeon Jun, 2019. "Sustainable Idea Development Mechanism in University Technology Commercialization (UTC): Perspectives from Dynamic Capabilities Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-16, November.
    9. Anne Miner & Yan Gong & Michael Ciuchta & Anthony Sadler & John Surdyk, 2012. "Promoting university startups: international patterns, vicarious learning and policy implications," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 213-233, April.
    10. Åstebro, Thomas & Bazzazian, Navid & Braguinsky, Serguey, 2012. "Startups by recent university graduates and their faculty: Implications for university entrepreneurship policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 663-677.
    11. 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.
    12. Wipo, 2011. "World Intellectual Property Report 2011- The Changing Face of Innovation," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2011:944, April.
    13. Francisco Javier Miranda & Antonio Chamorro & Sergio Rubio, 2018. "Re-thinking university spin-off: a critical literature review and a research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1007-1038, August.
    14. Belitski, Maksim & Aginskaja, Anna & Marozau, Radzivon, 2019. "Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 601-615.
    15. Wood, Matthew S., 2011. "A process model of academic entrepreneurship," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 153-161.
    16. Christoph Kober, 2010. "Enhancing Knowledge-Based Regional Economic Development: Potentials and Barriers for Technology Transfer Offices," NEURUS papers neurusp139, NEURUS - Network of European and US Regional and Urban Studies.
    17. 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.
    18. Einar Rasmussen & Paul Benneworth & Magnus Gulbrandsen, 2013. "Scoping paper: Developing University Innovation Capacity: How can innovation policy effectively harness universities’ capability to promote high-growth technology businesses?," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20131007, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    19. William R. Meek & Matthew S. Wood, 2016. "Navigating a Sea of Change: Identity Misalignment and Adaptation in Academic Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1093-1120, September.
    20. Jing Xia & Wei Liu & Sang-Bing Tsai & Guodong Li & Chien-Chi Chu & Kai Wang, 2018. "A System Dynamics Framework for Academic Entrepreneurship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-25, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology transfer; Commercialization; TTO; Valorization; Entrepreneurship; L32; L24; O31;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L32 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Enterprises; Public-Private Enterprises
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:40:y:2015:i:6:p:1034-1049. 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.