Advertisement

The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 19, Issue 3–4, pp 4–12 | Cite as

A partnership approach to successful, cost-effective technology transfer

Commentary

Abstract

The U.S. government, which funds virtually all types of basic research and development, can maximize its investment and best support technology transfer by focusing on R&D at its “budding” stage, and by involving large corporations, small businesses, and researchers in formal three-way partnerships to refine promising technologies and find suitable markets for them. This approach has the added benefit of requiring no additional, special funding for technology transfer. I propose a three-way technology transfer approach based on these concepts: the creation of a three-way partnership among researchers (the innovators), small business (the product/market developers), and industry (the end users of technology), with close liaison from day one for each project, and government serving as the facilitator; the selection of projects that will produce research and development results convertible to prototypes for testing in the end user’s environment; and the selection of projects that complement each other for building a critical mass of technology transfer from the bottom up. This type of approach utilizes the best attributes of each member of the technology partnership; focuses technology transfer efforts at the level of basic technology, where there is maximum flexibility and opportunity; and utilizes existing program funding to accomplish technology transfer objectives.

Keywords

Technology Transfer Small Business Basic Technology Program Funding Special Funding 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Memorandum of Policy 7, Revision 1.Joint Strategic Planning System. March 17, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer.Tapping Federal Technology: Inventions, Expertise, and Facilities. Washington, DC: September 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dertouzos, Michael L., Richard K. Lester, Robert M. Solow, and the MIT Commission on Industrial Productivity.Made in America: Regaining the Productive Edge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    DOD Directive 5000. 1.Major System Acquisition, September 1, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McGraw-Hill’sFederal Technology Report. September 30, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Strategic Defense Initiative Organization.Technology Applications Report August 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.Spinoffs 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    DOD Instruction 7045.14The Planning, Programming and Budgeting System. May 22, 1984.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.Technology Applications Report. 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.Spinoffs 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Technology Transfer Society 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kepi Wu

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations