IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v44y2019i1d10.1007_s10961-017-9598-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Engineering graduate students’ views on the effective ownership of academic patents

Author

Listed:
  • So Young Sohn

    (Yonsei University)

  • Eun Jin Han

    (Yonsei University)

Abstract

For sustainable and effective innovation, who should own an academic patent obtained as a result of funded research? The issue of ownership can influence the motivation of academic researchers. In this paper, we address this issue from the perspective of engineering graduate students who have experience of R&D projects. We aim to investigate engineering graduate students’ views on inter-organizations aspects of patent ownership; and patent ownership policies within university. In this paper, we carried out classification tree analyses of preferred ownership categories, using various factors related to ‘researchers and the environment for R&D,’ ‘technology,’ ‘patenting activities,’ ‘sponsors,’ ‘currently existing ownership policy,’ and ‘compensation policy’. Our findings can help design an effective ownership policy that promotes innovation by incorporating the views of students who will be important asset for future innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • So Young Sohn & Eun Jin Han, 2019. "Engineering graduate students’ views on the effective ownership of academic patents," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 132-154, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:44:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9598-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-9598-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-017-9598-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-017-9598-4?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Atul Nerkar & Peter W. Roberts, 2004. "Technological and product‐market experience and the success of new product introductions in the pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 779-799, August.
    2. Lynskey, Michael J., 2006. "Transformative technology and institutional transformation: Coevolution of biotechnology venture firms and the institutional framework in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1389-1422, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Geuna, Aldo & Rossi, Federica, 2011. "Changes to university IPR regulations in Europe and the impact on academic patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1068-1076, October.
    5. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2002. "Some Simple Economics of Open Source," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 197-234, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    8. Walter, Sascha G. & Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Achim, 2016. "Patenting rationales of academic entrepreneurs in weak and strong organizational regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 533-545.
    9. repec:bla:ecnote:v:33:y:2004:i:1:p:23-54 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S., 2005. "University-based technology initiatives: Quantitative and qualitative evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 253-257, April.
    11. Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "Patent quality and ownership: An analysis of UK faculty patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 564-576.
    12. 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.
    13. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    14. So Sohn & Mooyeob Lee, 2012. "Conjoint analysis of R&D contract agreements for industry-funded university research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 532-549, August.
    15. Pilar Mendoza, 2007. "Academic Capitalism and Doctoral Student Socialization: A Case Study," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 78(1), pages 71-96, January.
    16. Jaffe, Adam B & Lerner, Josh, 2001. "Reinventing Public R&D: Patent Policy and the Commercialization of National Laboratory Technologies," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 167-198, Spring.
    17. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    18. Haupt, Reinhard & Kloyer, Martin & Lange, Marcus, 2007. "Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 387-398, April.
    19. Harhoff, Dietmar & Hoisl, Karin, 2007. "Institutionalized incentives for ingenuity--Patent value and the German Employees' Inventions Act," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1143-1162, October.
    20. Bercovitz, Janet E.L. & Feldman, Maryann P., 2007. "Fishing upstream: Firm innovation strategy and university research alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 930-948, September.
    21. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2009. "Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1407-1422, November.
    22. Deng, Yi, 2007. "Private value of European patents," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1785-1812, October.
    23. Devrim Göktepe-Hulten & Prashanth Mahagaonkar, 2010. "Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: in the expectation of money or reputation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 401-423, August.
    24. Nicola Baldini & Rosa Grimaldi & Maurizio Sobrero, 2007. "To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 333-354, February.
    25. Baark, Erik, 1988. "The value of technology: A survey of the Chinese theoretical debate and its policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 269-282, October.
    26. Rory O’Shea & Harveen Chugh & Thomas Allen, 2008. "Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 653-666, December.
    27. Landry, Rejean & Amara, Nabil & Rherrad, Imad, 2006. "Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1599-1615, December.
    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. Charlotta Dahlborg & Danielle Lewensohn & Rickard Danell & Carl Johan Sundberg, 2017. "To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 538-563, June.
    2. Thomas Walter & Christoph Ihl & René Mauer & Malte Brettel, 2018. "Grace, gold, or glory? Exploring incentives for invention disclosure in the university context," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1725-1759, December.
    3. van Burg, Elco & Du, Jingshu & Kers, Jannigje Gerdien, 2021. "When do academics patent outside their university? An in-depth case study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Sabrina Backs & Markus Günther & Christian Stummer, 2019. "Stimulating academic patenting in a university ecosystem: an agent-based simulation approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 434-461, April.
    7. 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.
    8. Muscio, Alessandro & Quaglione, Davide & Ramaciotti, Laura, 2016. "The effects of university rules on spinoff creation: The case of academia in Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1386-1396.
    9. 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.
    10. Halilem, Norrin & Amara, Nabil & Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Mohiuddin, Muhammad, 2017. "“To Own, or not to Own?” A multilevel analysis of intellectual property right policies' on academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1479-1489.
    11. 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.
    12. repec:wip:wpaper:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Alan Hughes & Michael Kitson, 2012. "Pathways to Impact and the Strategic Role of Universities," Working Papers wp435, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    14. Scott Shane & Sharon Dolmans & Joseph Jankowski & Isabelle Reymen & A. Romme, 2015. "Academic entrepreneurship: Which inventors do technology licensing officers prefer for spinoffs?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 273-292, April.
    15. Pere Arqué-Castells & Rui M Cartaxo & Jose García-Quevedo & Manuel Mira Godinho, 2015. "How inventor royalty shares affect patenting and income in Portugal and Spain," Working Papers 2015/14, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    16. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2012. "Traditional Versus Heterodox Motives for Academic Patenting: Evidence from the Netherlands," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 671-695, November.
    17. 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.
    18. Wenjing Wang & Yiwei Liu, 2022. "Industrial funding and university technology transfer: the moderating role of intellectual property rights enforcement," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1549-1572, October.
    19. Munari, Federico & Sobrero, Maurizio & Toschi, Laura, 2018. "The university as a venture capitalist? Gap funding instruments for technology transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 70-84.
    20. Aldridge, T. Taylor & Audretsch, David, 2011. "The Bayh-Dole Act and scientist entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1058-1067, October.
    21. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi & Enza Setteducati & Alessio Ancaiani, 2014. "Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 169-198, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Academic patenting; Ownership issue; Engineering graduate students; Classification tree analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C38 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Classification Methdos; Cluster Analysis; Principal Components; Factor Analysis
    • 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:44:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9598-4. 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.