In this paper we identify the population of 32 US university-related Proof of Concept Centers (PoCCs), and we present a model of technology development that identifies the economic role of PoCCs within that model. We examine the broad technology transfer challenges that PoCCs have been established to address. Further, we argue that PoCCs are a growing technology infrastructure in the United States, and they are important as a possible element of our national innovation system.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
This September 2009 document was updated and released again in February 2011.
Partners in this cooperative effort included the Department of Energy along with the Economic Development Administration, the Department of Agriculture, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
The six organizations that received funding included the Iowa Innovation Network i6 Green Project in Ames; the Proof of Concept Center for Green Chemistry Scale-up in Holland, Michigan; the iGreen New England Partnership; the Igniting Innovation (I2) Cleantech Acceleration Network in Orlando, Florida; the Louisiana Tech Proof of Concept Center in Ruston; and the Washington State Clean Energy Partnership Project.
EERE (2011) views PoCCs within a broader context than a university, and thus they define POCCs as institutions that “support all aspects of the entrepreneurship process, from assisting with technology feasibility and business plan development, to providing access to early-stage capital and mentors to offer critical guidance to innovators. Centers allow emerging technologies to mature and demonstrate their market potential, making them more attractive to investors and helping entrepreneurs turn their idea or technology into a business.” See: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_id=503.
The inventor’s decision to disclose is influenced by the university’s reward systems and culture, as noted by the gray dashed arrows.
See Hayter (2011) for a complete discussion of spinoff success factors discussed in the extant literature.
See Rasmussen and Sørheim (2012) for a discussion of PoCCs from a public-sector perspective of bridging the funding gaps for university spinoffs.
Some might take issue with the centers that we have subjectively classified as PoCCs. If this is the case, it underscores that an accepted definition of a PoCC is evolving.
Year of establishment was determined from the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) data. When more than one university is associated with a POCC, the year of establishment for the oldest TTO was considered.
The t value for a test of differences in means assuming equal variance is −1.07 and the t value assuming unequal variances is −1.01. This same result follows from a probit model of the probability of a university being associated with a PoCC. Also held constant in the probit model was a binary variable for whether the university was public or private.
The underlying information came from the AUTM data.
Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44–60.
Aldrich, H. (1999). Organizations evolving. London: Sage Publications.
Aldrich, H., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645–670.
Almeida, P., & Kogut, B. (1999). Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks. Management Science, 45(7), 905–917.
Audretsch, D. B. (2000). Is university entrepreneurship different?. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University., mimeo.
Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation. American Economic Review, 86(3), 630–640.
Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2005). Do University policies make a difference? Research Policy, 34(3), 343–347.
Audretsch, D. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Warning, S. (2005). University spillovers and new firm location. Research Policy, 34(7), 1113–1122.
Auerswald, P., & Branscomb, L. M. (2003). Valleys of death and Darwinian seas: Financing the invention to innovation transition in the United States. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3–4), 227–239.
Bauer, E. (2001). Effects of patenting and licensing on research. Presentation to the National Academies Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Economy, 17 April.
Bekkers, R., Gilsing, V., & van der Steen, M. (2006). Determining factors of the effectiveness of IP-based spin-offs: Comparing the Netherlands and the US. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(5), 545–566.
Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 175–188.
Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., & Burton, R. (2001). Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: An exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania state Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 21–35.
Blair, D. M., & Hitchens, D. M. W. N. (1998). Campus companies—U.K. and Ireland. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Bradley, S. R., Hayter, C. S., & Link, A. N. (2013). Models and methods of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship (forthcoming).
Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of U.K. University technology transfer offices: Parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34(3), 369–384.
Chiesa, V., & Piccaluga, A. (2000). Exploitation and diffusion of public research: The case of academic spin-off companies in Italy. R & D Management, 30(4), 329–339.
Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response. Tertiary Education and Management, 4(1), 5–16.
Clarysse, B., Bruneel, J., & Wright, M. (2007). Growth strategies of young, technology-based firms. Paper presented at the Babson Conference on Entrepreneurship Research 2007.
Clarysse, B., & Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: The case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 55–79.
Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R. R., Rosenberg, N., et al. (2002). How do university inventions get into practice? Management Science, 48(1), 61–72.
Conceicao, P., Heitor, M. V., & Oliveira, P. (1998). University-based technology licensing in the knowledge based economy. Technovation, 18(10), 615–625.
Cooper, A. C. (1973). Technical entrepreneurship: What do we know? R&D Management, 3(2), 59–64.
Cooper, A. C. (1984). Contrasts in the role of incubator organizations in the founding of growth-oriented firms, Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley: Babson College.
Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342.
Degroof, J. J., & Roberts, E. B. (2004). Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructure for academic spin-off ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 327–357.
Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209–227.
Dietz, J. S. (2000). Building a social capital model of research development: The case of EPSCOR. Science and Public Policy, 27(2), 137–147.
Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349–367.
Doutriaux, J. (1987). Growth patterns of academic entrepreneurial firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 2(4), 285–297.
Druilhe, C., & Garnsey, E. (2004). Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 269–285.
EERE. (2011). Obama administration announces launch of i6 green challenge to promote clean energy innovation and economic growth. EERE News, http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_id=503.
Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1), 109–121.
Executive Office of the President. (2009). A strategy for American innovation: Driving towards sustainable growth and quality jobs. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.
Feldman, M. P., & Desrochers, P. (2004). Truth for its own sake: Academic culture and technology transfer at Johns Hopkins University. Minerva, 42(2), 105–126.
Franklin, S. J., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 127–141.
Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. (2003). University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 17–30.
G, C., & Fier, H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: A comparison between the United States and Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 637–650.
Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35(6), 790–807.
Goldhor, R. S., & Lund, R. T. (1983). University-to-industry advanced technology transfer. Research Policy, 12(3), 121–152.
Golub, E. (2003). Generating spin-offs from university-based research: The potential of technology transfer, PhD dissertation. Manhattan: Columbia University.
Grandi, A., & Grimaldi, R. (2003). Exploring the networking characteristics of new venture founding teams. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 329–341.
Grandi, A., & Grimaldi, R. (2005). Academics’ organizational characteristics and the generation of successful business ideas. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(6), 821–845.
Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6), 932–950.
Gulbranson, C. A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2008). Proof of Concept Centers: Accelerating the commercialization of university innovation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 249–258.
Hayter, C. (2011). In search of the profit-maximizing actor: Motivations and definitions of success from nascent academic entrepreneurs. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 340–352.
Heirman, A., & Clarysse, B. (2004). How and why do research-based startups differ at founding? A resource-based configurational perspective. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 247–268.
Hellmann, T., & Puri, M. (2002). Venture capital and the professionalism of start-up firms: Empirical evidence. The Journal of Finance, 57(1), 169–197.
Hsu, D. H., & Bernstein, T. (1997). Managing the university technology licensing process. Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 9, 1–33.
Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., & Hellsmark, H. (2003). Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish University system: The case of Chalmers University of Technology. Research Policy, 32(9), 1555–1568.
Jaffe, A. B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.
Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.
Jensen, R. A., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240–259.
Jensen, R. A., Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2003). Disclosure and licensing of university inventions: ‘the best we can do with the ST we get to work with? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1271–1300.
Johansson, M., Jacob, M., & Hellstrom, T. (2005). The strength of strong ties: University spin-offs and the significance of historical relations. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(3), 271–286.
Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. (2004). The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy, 33(5), 691–707.
Klepper, S., & Sleeper, S. (2005). Entry by spin offs. Management Science, 51(8), 1291–1306.
Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. (2002). Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69(7), 681–701.
Lee, Y. S. (1996). Technology transfer and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25(6), 843–863.
Lerner, J. (2005). The university and the start-up: Lessons from the past two decades. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1–2), 49–56.
Liebeskind, J. P., Oliver, A. L., Zucker, L., & Brewer, M. (1996). Social networks, learning, and flexibility: Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Science, 7(4), 428–443.
Link, A. N., & Scott, J. 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, 34(7), 1106–1112.
Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641–655.
Litan, R., Mitchell, L., & Reedy, E. J. (2007). The university as innovator: Bumps in the road. Issues in Science and Technology, 23(4), 57–66.
Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043–1057.
Louis, K. S., Jones, L. M., Anderson, M. S., Blumenthal, D., & Campbell, E. G. (2001). Entrepreneurship, secrecy, and productivity: A comparison of clinical and non-clinical life sciences faculty. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 233–245.
Lowe, R. A. (2002). Invention, innovation and entrepreneurship: The commercialization of university research by inventor-founded firms, PhD dissertation. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley.
Maia, C., & Claro, J. (2012). The role of a Proof of Concept Center in a university ecosystem: An exploratory study. Journal of Technology Transfer. doi:10.1007/s10961-012-9246-y.
Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2004). Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 353–364.
Martinelli, A., Meyer, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2008). Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 259–283.
Matkin, G. W. (1990). Technology transfer and the university. New York: Macmillan.
Meyer, M. (2006). Are co-active researchers on top of their class? An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-ccience and technology, SPRU Electronic Working Paper Series 144. University of Sussex, SPRU—Science and Technology Policy Research.
Mitchell, W. (1991). Using academic technology: Transfer methods and licensing incidence in the commercialization of American diagnostic imaging equipment research, 1954–1988. Research Policy, 20(3), 203–216.
Moray, N., & Clarysse, B. (2005). Institutional change and resource endowments to science-based entrepreneurial firms. Research Policy, 34(7), 1010–1027.
Murray, F. E. (2004). The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: Sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, 33(4), 643–659.
National Science Board. (2012). Science and engineering indicators 2012. Arlington VA: National Science Foundation (NSB 12-01).
Nerkar, A., & Shane, Scott. (2003). When do start-ups that exploit patented academic knowledge survive? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1391–1410.
Nicolaou, N., & Birley, S. (2003). Academic networks in a trichotomous categorisation of university spinouts. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 333–359.
O’Gorman, C., Byrne, O., & Pandya, D. (2008). How scientists commercialize new knowledge via entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 23–43.
O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.
O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., O’Gorman, C., & Roche, F. (2004). Universities and technology transfer: A review of academic entrepreneurship literature. Irish Journal of Management, 25(2), 11–29.
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 99–114.
Perez, M. P., & Sanchez, A. M. (2003). The development of university spin-offs: Early dynamics of technology transfer and networking. Technovation, 23(10), 823–831.
Piore, M., & Sabel, C. (1984). The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books.
Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organization, 12, 295–336.
Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291–311.
Radosevich, R. (1995). A model for entrepreneurial spin-offs from public technology sources. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(7–8), 879–893.
Rappert, B., Webster, A., & Charles, D. (1999). Making sense of diversity and reluctance: Academic-industrial relations and intellectual property. Research Policy, 28(8), 873–890.
Rasmussen, E., & Sørheim, R. (2012). How governments seek to bridge the financing gap for university spin-offs: Proof-of-concept, pre-seed, and seed funding. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 24(7), 663–678.
Renault, C. S. (2006). Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227–239.
Roberts, E. B. (1991). The technological base of the new enterprise. Research Policy, 20(4), 283–297.
Roberts, E. B. (2009). Entrepreneurial impact: The role of MIT. Kansas City: The Kauffman Foundation.
Roberts, E. B., & Malone, D. E. (1996). Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from research and development organizations. R & D Management, 26(1), 17–48.
Roberts, E. B., & Peters, D. H. (1981). Commercial innovation from university faculty. Research Policy, 10(2), 108–126.
Rogers, E. M., Takegami, S., & Yin, J. (2001). Lessons learned about technology transfer. Technovation, 21(4), 253–261.
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791.
Samson, K. J., & Gurdon, M. A. (1993). University scientists as entrepreneurs: A special case of technology transfer and high-tech venturing. Technovation, 13(2), 63–71.
Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Shane, S. (2004). Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 127–151.
Shane, S., & Stuart, T. E. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.
Siegel, D. S. (2011). Academic entrepreneurship: Lessons learned for university administrators and policymakers. Presented at the Strategic Management of Places Conference, December 13, 2011.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: Qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management’, 21(1–2), 115–142.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., & Link, A. N. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Steffensen, M., Rogers, E. M., & Speakman, K. (2000). Spin-offs from research centers at a research university. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(1), 93–111.
Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R. A., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major U.S. universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 59–70.
Thursby, J. G., & Kemp, S. (2002). Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy, 31(1), 109–124.
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2003). University licensing and the Bayh-Dole Act. Science, 301(22), 1052.
Tornatzky, L. G., Waugaman, P. G., Lucinda Casson, S., Crowell, C. S., & Wong, F. (1995). Benchmarking best practices for university-industry technology transfer: Working with start-up companies, A Report of the Southern Technology Council. Atlanta: Southern Technology Council.
Utterback, J. M. (1994). Mastering the dynamics of innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147–175.
Westhead, P., & Storey, D. J. (1994). An assessment of firms located on and off science parks in the United Kingdom. London: HMSO.
Westhead, P., & Storey, D. J. (1997) .Training provision and development of small and medium-sized enterprises. Research Report No. 26, London: DfEE.
Wright, M., Mosey, S., & Noke, H. (2011). Academic entrepreneurship and economic competitiveness: Rethinking the role of the entrepreneur. Keynote Paper: International Conference on Academic Entrepreneurship: Basque Institute of Competitiveness (San Sebastian, Spain), September 8–9, 2011.
Wright, M., Vohora, A., & Lockett, A. (2004). The formation of high-tech university spinouts: The role of joint ventures and venture capital investors. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 287–310.
Zahra, S. A., Van de Velde, E., & Larraneta, B. (2007). Knowledge conversion capability and the performance of corporate and university spin-offs. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 569–608.
Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (2001). Capturing technological opportunity via Japan’s star scientists: Evidence from Japanese firms’ biotech patents and products. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 37–58.
Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Armstrong, J. S. (2002). Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science, 48(1), 138–153.
Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Brewer, M. B. (1998). Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88(1), 290–306.
See Table 4.
About this article
Cite this article
Bradley, S.R., Hayter, C.S. & Link, A.N. Proof of Concept Centers in the United States: an exploratory look. J Technol Transf 38, 349–381 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-013-9309-8