Abstract
In this article, we propose that universities engaged in technology transfer activities can be viewed as the University Technology Commercialization (UTC) industry. We use an organizational population ecology perspective to outline an economic model for the analysis of the UTC industry. We introduce cohort analysis and time-lagged comparisons of multiple stages in the commercialization process to examine the efficiency and productivity of the industry. Our main source of data is the Association of University Technology Managers licensing surveys from 1991 through 2004. Results indicate that industry growth is slowing, and that the technology transfer process is becoming less efficient; opportunities for individual and/or collective action are noted.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ardichvili, A., Harmon, B., Cardozo, R., Reynolds, P., & Williams, M. (1998). New venture growth: Functional differentiation and the need for human resource development interventions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(1), 55–70.
Arora, A., Fosfuri, A., & Gambardella, A. (2002). Markets for technology: The economics of innovation and corporate strategy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Association of University Technology Managers. (2005a). AUTM licensing survey FY 2004. Norwalk, CT: Association of University Technology Managers. (We have utilized AUTM Licensing Survey Reports with survey data covering each fiscal year from 1991 through 2004. To save space, we provide a full reference to the FY 2004 Survey Full Report).
Association of University Technology Managers. (2005b). AUTM 2004 salary survey. Norwalk, CT: Association of University Technology Managers.
Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 627–655.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2009). Consumer price index conversion factors for 2005. Retrieved from: http://www.bls.gov/cpi/.
Cardozo, R., Elder, T., & Harmon, B. (1996). When does growth pay? In P. Reynolds, et al. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Babson Park, MA: Babson College.
Cardozo, R., & Engleman, R. (2004). University technology and new business opportunities. In P. Reynolds, et al. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Babson Park, MA: Babson College.
Carlsson, B., & Fridh, A. (2002). Technology transfer in United States universities. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12, 199–232.
Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of UK university technology transfer offices: Parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34, 369–384.
Churchill, N., & Lewis, V. (1983). The five stages of small business growth. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 61, 30–50.
David, P. (1997). The knowledge factor: A survey of universities. The Economist, October, 4, 4.
Dean, A., & Kretschmer, M. (2007). Can ideas be capital? Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 573–594.
Gardiner, G. (1998). Accessed at: http://www.yale.edu/ocr/images/docs/ocr_report_96-98.pdf.
Graff, G., Heiman, A., & Zilberman, D. (2002). University research and offices of technology transfer. California Management Review, 45(1), 88–115.
Graham, S. (2009). Patents and technology markets. Accessed at: http://ftc.gov/bc/workshops/ipmarketplace/apr17/docs/sgraham.pdf.
Hall, B., Thoma, G., & Torrisi, S. (2007). The market value of patents and R&DC: Evidence from European firms. Working paper #13426. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hannan, M. T., & Carroll, G. R. (1992). Dynamics of organizational population density. legitimation and competition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Herath, H. S. B., & Park, C. S. (1999). Economic analysis of R&D projects: An options approach. Engineering Economist, 44(1), 1–36.
Jensen, P., & Webster, J. (2007). Industry dynamics: Setting the scene. Australian Economic Review, 40(1), 80–81.
Johnson, G., Scholes, K., & Whittington, R. (2006). Exploring corporate strategy. NY: Prentice Hall International.
Lambert, R. (2003). Lambert review of business-university collaboration. London: HM Treasury.
Levine, A. (1997). Higher education’s new status as a mature industry. Chronicle of Higher Education, 43, A48.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2009). Absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and the complementarity of organizational learning processes. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 822–846.
Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 241–263.
Mowery, D., Nelson, R., Sampat, B., & Ziedonis, A. (2004). Ivory tower and industrial innovation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Nelsen, L. (2004). A US perspective on technology transfer: The changing role of the university. Nature Reviews: Molecular Cell Biology, 5, 1–5.
Niosi, J. (2006). Introduction to the symposium: Universities as a source of commercial technology. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 399–402.
Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. NY: Wiley.
Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–192.
Powers, J. (2004). R&D funding sources and university technology transfer: What is stimulating universities to be more entrepreneurial? Research in Higher Education, 45(1), 1–23.
Rahal, A., & Rabelo, L. (2006). Assessment framework for the evaluation and prioritization of university inventions for licensing and commercialization. Engineering Management Journal, 18(4), 28–36.
Rao, D. (2006). Designing successful venture capital funds for area development: Bridging the hierarchy & equity gaps. Applied Research in Economic Development, 3(2), 27–44.
Research Universities. (2008). Education encyclopedia—StateUniversity.com: Retrieved on November 14, 2008 at: http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2366/Research-Universities.html.
Rogan, J. (2003). Statement before the subcommittee on courts, the internet and intellectual property, committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives. Accessed at: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/om/speeches/stratplan2003apr03rogan.htm.
Serrano, C. (2006). The market for intellectual property: Evidence from the transfer of patents. Accessed at www.chass.utoronto.ca/~serrano/eco2404/transfers_kelowna.pdf.
Siegel, D., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660.
Siegel, D., Waldman, D., Atwater, L., & Link, A. (2003). Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university-industry collaboration. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14, 111–133.
Siegel, D., Wright, M., Chapple, W., & Lockett, A. (2008). Assessing the relative performance of university technology transfer in the US and US: A stochastic distance function approach. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(7), 719–731.
Smilor, R., O’Donnell, N., Stein, G., & Welborn, R. S., III. (2007). The research university and the development of high-technology centers in the United States. Economic Development Quarterly, 21(3), 203–222.
Stern, S. (2009). The impact of the patent system on the market for technology. Accessed at: http://ftc.gov/bc/workshops/ipmarketplace/mar18/docs/sstern.pdf.
Stienbach, N. (2005). Just how many universities are there in the US? Accessed at http://www.voanews.com/specialenglish/archive/2005-05/2005-05-11-voal.cfm?renderfo.
Watanabe, Y. (2009). Patent licensing and the emergence of a new patent market. Houston Business and Tax Law Journal, IX, 446–481.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge with gratitude the comments and suggestions of anonymous reviewers and the editor, whose input contributed significantly to this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cardozo, R., Ardichvili, A. & Strauss, A. Effectiveness of university technology transfer: an organizational population ecology view of a maturing supplier industry. J Technol Transf 36, 173–202 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9151-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9151-1