IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/poicbe/v11y2017i1p994-1008n104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new set of performance indicators for improving the capitalization process of Intellectual Property

Author

Listed:
  • Hadăr Alexandra

    (University Politehnica of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Purcărea Anca Alexandra

    (University Politehnica of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

Performance indicators of technology transfer/knowledge activity, of intellectual property capitalization in a technical university as well as those referring to the monitoring of academic entrepreneurship are closely correlated, in terms of objectives and strategies adopted at European level, in the context of the third mission undertaken by universities of the XXI century. So far, a systematic research on the development about the capitalization process of intellectual propertytechnical universities in Romania was not conducted. In this context, the analysis and adoption of a new set of indicators for monitoring and evaluating institutional performance, appropriate to an optimization model applicable in academic environment, is required to support the growth of its competitiveness. The present analysis involved the achievement of a research in two stages, one quantitative and the other qualitative, defining, in a rational manner, the set of indicators for monitoring and evaluating the institutional performance. Analysis began with a quantitative research, where the number of indicators, originally envisaged, was limited. Following this research there were retained only the indicators having a weight of over 50%. For a better formulation of the problem investigated and for some conceptual clarification it was achieved a qualitative research, conducted through a focus group, two authors scrolling two such research. Following qualitative research, carried out in order to classify indicators for monitoring and evaluation the performance analysis of technology transfer / knowledge within a public research organizations, i.e. a technical university, we decided the importance ranking of the first three indicators: a) the number of direct contracts with the socio - economic environment; b) the number of contracts and research projects financed through competitive mechanisms, in collaboration with partners from outside the academic environment and c) the revenue generated from the commercialization of knowledge from higher education institutions (revenue from licenses, income from royalties etc.).

Suggested Citation

  • Hadăr Alexandra & Purcărea Anca Alexandra, 2017. "A new set of performance indicators for improving the capitalization process of Intellectual Property," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 994-1008, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:994-1008:n:104
    DOI: 10.1515/picbe-2017-0104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/picbe-2017-0104
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/picbe-2017-0104?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Youtie, Jan & Shapira, Philip, 2008. "Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1188-1204, September.
    2. Bozeman, Barry & Rimes, Heather & Youtie, Jan, 2015. "The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 34-49.
    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. 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.
    2. Paula Kivimaa & Wouter Boon & Riina Antikainen, 2017. "Commercialising university inventions for sustainability—a case study of (non-)intermediating ‘cleantech’ at Aalto University," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 631-644.
    3. Rodica Pamfilie & Smaranda Giusca & Robert Bumbac, 2014. "Academic research – a catalyst for the innovation process within companies in Romania," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 16(37), pages 759-759, August.
    4. Tan Yigitcanlar & Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Hjalti Johannesson & Md Kamruzzaman & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Surabhi Pancholi, 2017. "Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(12), pages 2272-2292, December.
    5. MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki & ZHAO Qiuhan, 2023. "University as a Knowledge Source of Innovation: A spatial analysis of the impact on local high-tech startup creation," Discussion papers 23027, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    6. Aschhoff, Birgit & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2008. "Successful Patterns of Scientific Knowledge Sourcing: Mix and Match," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-033 [rev.], ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. de Almeida, Liliane & Augusto de Jesus Pacheco, Diego & Caten, Carla Schwengber ten & Jung, Carlos Fernando, 2021. "A methodology for identifying results and impacts in technological innovation projects," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    8. Patrick S. Roberts & Jon Schmid, 2022. "Government‐led innovation acceleration: Case studies of US federal government innovation and technology acceleration organizations," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 353-378, May.
    9. Christoph March & Ina Schieferdecker, 2021. "Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky," CESifo Working Paper Series 9139, CESifo.
    10. KANG Byeongwoo & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2020. "Local Industry Influence on Commercialization of University Research by University Startups," Discussion papers 20086, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    11. Mario BENASSI & Matteo LANDONI & Francesco RENTOCCHINI, 2017. "University Management Practices and Academic Spin-offs," Departmental Working Papers 2017-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    12. Christopher S. Hayter, 2016. "A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 633-656, October.
    13. Jukka Majava & Ville Isoherranen & Pekka Kess, 2013. "Business Collaboration Concepts and Implications for Companies," International Journal of Synergy and Research, ToKnowPress, vol. 2(1), pages 23-40.
    14. Ioanna Kastelli & Aggelos Tsakanikas & Yannis Caloghirou, 2018. "Technology transfer as a mechanism for dynamic transformation in the food sector," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 882-900, August.
    15. Hoppmann, Joern, 2021. "Hand in hand to Nowhereland? How the resource dependence of research institutes influences their co-evolution with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    16. Dezhong Duan & Yang Zhang & Ying Chen & Debin Du, 2019. "Regional Integration in the Inter-City Technology Transfer System of the Yangtze River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, May.
    17. Ranga, Marina & Hoareau, Cecile & Durazzi, Niccolo & Etzkowitz, Henry & Marcucci, Pamela & Usher, Alex, 2013. "Study on university-business cooperation in the US," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 55424, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Yuriy Kharytonov & Serhii Slobodian & Marina Podaienko, 2021. "Development Of Models Of Technology Transfer For Public Works," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 7(4).
    19. Eileen M. Trauth & Michael DiRaimo Jr. & M. Richard Hoover Jr. & Paul Hallacher, 2015. "Leveraging a Research University for New Economy Capacity Building in a Rural Industrial Region," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(3), pages 229-244, August.
    20. Neil Lee & Stephen Clarke, 2017. "Who gains from high-tech growth? High-technology multipliers, employment and wages in Britain," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    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:vrs:poicbe:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:994-1008:n:104. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.