Skip to main content
Log in

Exploring capabilities of international technology transfer intermediaries between emerging and developed countries

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We report which capabilities are essential to a successful demand-driven inter-organizational international technology transfer (ITT) when a business deal involves an emerging country recipient and a developed country source. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study collected opinions from 74 experts from 12 countries on technology transfer and diffusion, innovation systems and networks, and knowledge-intensive business services. In a preliminary attempt to identify which skills are critical, we present the perspective of emerging countries’ stakeholders. The suggested 28 critical capabilities can be used as an input for further empirical analysis. The conceptual framework can be applied to assess an intermediary’s performance for a given ITT project in which the demand arises from an emerging-country stakeholder.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article (and/or its supplementary information files).

Code availability (software application)

Not applicable.

References

  • Aengenheyster, S., Cuhls, K., Gerhold, L., Heiskanen-Schüttler, M., Huck, J., & Muszynska, M. (2017). Real-time Delphi in practice—A comparative analysis of existing software-based tools. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 118, 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agogué, M., Berthet, E., Fredberg, T., Le Masson, P., Segrestin, B., Stoetzel, M., et al. (2017). Explicating the role of innovation intermediaries in the “unknown”: a contingency approach. Journal of Strategy and Management.

  • Agogué, M., Yström, A., & Le Masson, P. (2013). Rethinking the role of intermediaries as an architect of collective exploration and creation of knowledge in open innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 17(02), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahammad, M. F., Tarba, S. Y., Liu, Y., & Glaister, K. W. (2016). Knowledge transfer and cross-border acquisition performance: The impact of cultural distance and employee retention. International Business Review, 25(1), 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, A. T., & Martin, D. P. (2013). Intermediaries for open innovation: A competence-based comparison of knowledge transfer offices practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(1), 38–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, K. R. (2012). Technology commercialization: have we learned anything? The Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, D. J., & Quelch, J. A. (1998). New strategies in emerging markets. MIT Sloan Management Review, 40(1), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrieta, A., Peña, I., Cruz, M., Costa, G., & Coronel, F. (2017). Tecnolatinas: Latin America Riding the Technology Tsunami. Inter-American Development Bank.

  • Arroteia, N., & Hafeez, K. (2017). The rise of technolatinas: Measuring the determinants of internationalization for the Brazilian technology start-ups. In Paris school of business’s symposium and doctoral workshop on entrepreneurship research. Accessed 26 May 2019

  • Audretsch, D. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Wright, M. (2014). Technology transfer in a global economy. The Journal of Technology transfer, 39(3), 301–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battistella, C., De Toni, A. F., & Pillon, R. (2016). Inter-organisational technology/knowledge transfer: a framework from critical literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(5), 1195–1234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, S. M., & Flagg, J. L. (2010). Technology transfer and technology transfer intermediaries. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 6(1), 129–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beltran, L. F., Almendarez, M. A., Flores, V. H., Trejo, K. S., Lagunas, M., & Ortega, A. (2020). Technology transfer offices as promoters of technology, innovation and regional development in mexico. International Journal of Innovation, 8(1), 121–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharosa, N., & Janssen, M. (n.d.). Digicampus—Preliminary Lessons from a Quadruple Helix Ecosystem for Public Service Innovation. EGOV-CeDEM-ePart 2020, 195.

  • Bodas Freitas, I. M., Marques, R. A., de Silva, E. M., & P. e. . (2013). University–industry collaboration and innovation in emergent and mature industries in new industrialized countries. Research Policy, 42(2), 443–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonfim, L. R. C., Segatto, A. P., & Gonçalves, S. A. (2018). A conical-helix model of technology transfer and public-private partnerships for technological development in Brazilian public health. Technology in Society, 53, 110–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 627–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., & Youtie, J. (2015). The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model. Research Policy, 44(1), 34–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brem, A., & Moitra, D. (2012). Learning from Failure: Case insights into a UK-India technology transfer project. In D. B. Audretsch, E. E. Lehmann, A. N. Link, & A. Starnecker (Eds.), Technology transfer in a global economy (pp. 253–275). Boston, MA: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bunker, D. (n.d.). A philosophy of information technology and systems (IT & S) as tools: Tool development context, associated skills and the global technology transfer (GTT) process.

  • Burhan, M., Singh, A. K., & Jain, S. K. (2017). Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. S., & Gibson, D. V. (2011). Global perspectives on technology transfer and commercialization: Building innovative ecosystems. Amsterdam: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cantu-Ortiz, F. J., Galeano, N., Mora-Castro, P., & Fangmeyer, J. (2017). Spreading academic entrepreneurship: Made in Mexico. Amsterdam: Business Horizons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capaldo, A., & Messeni Petruzzelli, A. (2015). Origins of knowledge and innovation in R&D alliances: a contingency approach. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(4), 461–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Provance, M. (2008). Measuring firm innovativeness: towards a composite innovation index built on firm innovative posture, propensity and performance attributes. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(1), 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Provance, M., & Grigoroudis, E. (2016). Entrepreneurship ecosystems: An agent-based simulation approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer.

  • Catalán, P., Sepúlveda, E., & Zapata, A. (2019). Technology transfer in chilean universities: The case of the university of concepcion. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 14(3), 57–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakroun, N. (2017). Using technology transfer offices to foster technological development: A proposal based on a combination of articles 66.2 and 67 of the TRIPS agreement. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 20(3–4), 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, D.-W., & Shenkoya, T. (2019). Technology transfer: economic factors that influence transferor and transferee’s choice. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 1–13.

  • Choe, W. J., & Ji, I. (2019). The performance of supply-push versus demand-pull technology transfer and the role of technology marketing strategies: The case of a Korean Public Research Institute. Sustainability: Science Practice and Policy, 11(7), 2005.

  • Choo Huang, C., Tayles, M., & Luther, R. (2010). Contingency factors influencing the availability of internal intellectual capital information. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 8(1), 4–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cimoli, M., Pereima, J. B., & Porcile, G. (2019). A technology gap interpretation of growth paths in Asia and Latin America. Research Policy, 48(1), 125–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Datta, A., Mukherjee, D., & Jessup, L. (2015). Understanding commercialization of technological innovation: Taking stock and moving forward. R&D Management, 45(3), 215–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Fuentes, C., Santiago, F., & Temel, S. (2020). Perception of innovation barriers by successful and unsuccessful innovators in emerging economies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45(4), 1283–1307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de la Tour, A., Glachant, M., & Ménière, Y. (2011). Innovation and international technology transfer: The case of the Chinese photovoltaic industry. Energy Policy, 39(2), 761–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Silva, M., Howells, J., & Meyer, M. (2018). Innovation intermediaries and collaboration: Knowledge–based practices and internal value creation. Research Policy, 47(1), 70–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhewanto, W., & Sohal, A. S. (2015). The relationship between organisational orientation and research and development/technology commercialisation performance. R&D Management, 45(4), 339–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edler, J., & Yeow, J. (2016). Connecting demand and supply: The role of intermediation in public procurement of innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), 414–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2018). Introduction to theory-generating meta-synthesis research. A Guide to Qualitative Meta-Synthesis, 1–12.

  • Fredberg, T., Le Masson, P., & Segrestin, B. (2017). Explicating the role of innovation intermediaries in the “unknown”: a contingency approach. The Journal of Business Strategy.

  • Frishammar, J., Lichtenthaler, U., & Rundquist, J. (2012). Identifying technology commercialization opportunities: The importance of integrating product development knowledge. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(4), 573–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garengo, P. (2019). How bridging organisations manage technology transfer in SMEs: An empirical investigation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 31(4), 477–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6), 897–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnatzy, T., Warth, J., von der Gracht, H., & Darkow, I.-L. (2011). Validating an innovative real-time Delphi approach—A methodological comparison between real-time and conventional Delphi studies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(9), 1681–1694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomes, M. A. S., & Kovaleski, J. L. (2018). International technology transfer and the irruptive processes: An analysis model for the offset policy. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 16(2), 103–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Good, M., Knockaert, M., & Soppe, B. (2019). A typology of technology transfer ecosystems: how structure affects interactions at the science–market divide. The Journal of Technology Transfer.

  • Good, M., Knockaert, M., Soppe, B., & Wright, M. (2019). The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An Organizational Design perspective. Technovation, 82–83, 35–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goth, G. (2006). Global technology transfer infrastructure is maturing. IEEE Software, 23(4), 93–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grisham, T. (2009). The Delphi technique: A method for testing complex and multifaceted topics. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2(1), 112–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, M., Kim, S. M., & Brinckmann, J. (2015). What is an attractive business opportunity? An empirical study of opportunity evaluation decisions by technologists, managers, and entrepreneurs. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 9(3), 205–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J., Lorenz-Orlean, S., & van Kranenburg, H. (2008). Inter-firm technology transfer: Partnership-embedded licensing or standard licensing agreements? Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(3), 529–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamid, N. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2014). A systematic literature review on the success factor of innovation commercialization performance. In 2014 international symposium on technology management and emerging technologies.

  • Han, J. (2017). Technology commercialization through sustainable knowledge sharing from university-industry collaborations, with a focus on patent propensity. Sustainability: Science Practice and Policy, 9(10): 1808

  • Hasson, F., & Keeney, S. (2011). Enhancing rigour in the Delphi technique research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(9), 1695–1704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(4), 1008–1015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, B., & Javorcik, B. S. (2006). Global integration and technology transfer. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hohmann, E., Brand, J. C., Rossi, M. J., & Lubowitz, J. H. (2018). Expert opinion is necessary: Delphi panel methodology facilitates a scientific approach to consensus. Arthroscopy, 34(2), 349–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzmann, T., Sailer, K., & Katzy, B. R. (2014a). Matchmaking as a multi-sided market for open innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(6), 601–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzmann, T., Sailer, K., Galbraith, B., & Katzy, B. R. (2014b). Matchmaking for open innovation – theoretical perspectives based on interaction, rather than transaction. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(6), 595–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, C.-C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). Minimizing non-response in the Delphi process: How to respond to non-response. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(17), 62–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Intarakumnerd, P., & Chaoroenporn, P. (2013). The roles of intermediaries and the development of their capabilities in sectoral innovation systems: a case study of Thailand. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 21(sup2), 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D., & Onyemah, V. (2016). Fostering scaleup ecosystems for regional economic growth (innovations case narrative: manizales-mas and scale up milwaukee). Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 11(1–2), 60–79.

  • Izmaylov, Y., Slyusarenko, K., & Sheludiakova, N. (2017). Problems and prospects of international technology transfer between EU countries and Ukraine in the framework of implementation of the pan-european development strategy. Scientific Journal of Polonia University, 25(6), 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D. J. (2011). What is an innovation ecosystem? National Science Foundation.

  • Jagoda, K., Maheshwari, B., & Lonseth, R. (2010). Key issues in managing technology transfer projects: Experiences from a Canadian SME. Management Decision, 48(3), 366–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jandhyala, S., & Phene, A. (2015). The role of intergovernmental organizations in cross-border knowledge transfer and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(4), 712–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M. J., Bogers, M., & Wanzenböck, I. (2019). Do systemic innovation intermediaries broaden horizons? A proximity perspective on R&D partnership formation. Industry and Innovation, 1–25.

  • Jordan, R., Kassicieh, S., Franco, P., Agi, K., Lightman, A., & Moscheta, R. A. (2014). Global innovation network for entrepreneurship and technology (GINET). In 2014 international conference on interactive collaborative learning (ICL).

  • Jun, Y., & Ji, I. (2016). Demand-pull technology transfer and needs-articulation of users: A preliminary study. Procedia Computer Science, 91, 287–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantis, H., & Angelelli, P. (2020). Emprendimientos de base científico-tecnológica en América Latina: Importancia, desafíos y recomendaciones para el futuro. Inter-American Development Bank.

  • Katzy, B., Turgut, E., Holzmann, T., & Sailer, K. (2013). Innovation intermediaries: A process view on open innovation coordination. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(3), 295–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khayyat, N. T., & Lee, J.-D. (2015). A measure of technological capabilities for developing countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, 210–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y.-C., Rhee, M., & Kotha, R. (2019). Many hands: The effect of the prior inventor-intermediaries relationship on academic licensing. Research Policy, 48(3), 813–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchberger, M. A., & Pohl, L. (2016). Technology commercialization: A literature review of success factors and antecedents across different contexts. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(5), 1077–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivimaa, P., Boon, W., Hyysalo, S., & Klerkx, L. (2019). Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 48(4), 1062–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., & Leeuwis, C. (2008). Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries. Food Policy, 33(3), 260–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., Álvarez, R., & Campusano, R. (2015). The emergence and functioning of innovation intermediaries in maturing innovation systems: The case of Chile. Innovation and Development, 5(1), 73–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klintenberg, P., Wallin, F., & Azimoh, L. C. (2014). Successful technology transfer: What does it take? Applied Energy, 130, 807–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koberg, C. S., Uhlenbruck, N., & Sarason, Y. (1996). Facilitators of organizational innovation: The role of life-cycle stage. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(2), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, S.-W., Rondi, E., Levin, D. Z., De Massis, A., & Brass, D. J. (2020). Network brokerage: An integrative review and future research agenda. Journal of Management, 46(6), 1092–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, J. P. (1999). Understanding technology transfer. Assistive Technology: The Official Journal of RESNA, 11(1), 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, M., Wall, A., Norström, C., & Crnkovic, I. (2006). Technology transfer: why some succeed and some don’t. In Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Software technology transfer in software engineering (pp. 23–28).

  • Larsson, M., Wall, A., Norström, C., & Crnkovic, I. (2006). Technology transfer: Why some succeed and some don’t. In Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on software technology transfer in software engineering (pp. 23–28). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Accessed 20 November 2020

  • Lee, J. (2010). 10 year retrospect on stage models of e-Government: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Government information quarterly.

  • Lee, J. J., & Yoon, H. (2015). A comparative study of technological learning and organizational capability development in complex products systems: Distinctive paths of three latecomers in military aircraft industry. Research Policy, 44(7), 1296–1313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M., Lee, M., & Kim, J. (2017). A dynamic approach to The start-up business ecosystem: A cross-comparison of Korea, China, and Japan. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 22(2).

  • Lee, S., Kim, B. S., Kim, Y., Kim, W., & Ahn, W. (2018). The framework for factors affecting technology transfer for suppliers and buyers of technology in Korea. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(2), 172–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Park, G., Yoon, B., & Park, J. (2010). Open innovation in SMEs—An intermediated network model. Research Policy, 39(2), 290–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Yoon, B., Lee, C., & Park, J. (2009). Business planning based on technological capabilities: Patent analysis for technology-driven roadmapping. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 769–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leischnig, A., & Geigenmüller, A. (2018). Examining alliance management capabilities in university-industry collaboration. The Journal of Technology Transfer.

  • Li-Ying, J. (2012). What do we need from intermediaries for technology transfer to China? A European Firm Perspective. Prometheus, 30(2), 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, C., Lan, T., & Liu, S.-J. (2015). Patent attorney as technology intermediary: A patent attorney-facilitated model of technology transfer in developing countries. World Patent Information, 43, 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, B.-W., Chen, C.-J., & Wu, H.-L. (2006). Patent portfolio diversity, technology strategy, and firm value. In IEEE transactions on engineering management.

  • Liu, S., Fang, Z., Shi, H., & Guo, B. (2016). Theory of science and technology transfer and applications. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Luintel, K. B., & Khan, M. (2017). Ideas production and international knowledge spillovers: Digging deeper into emerging countries. Research Policy, 46(10), 1738–1754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, X.-F., Kaldenbach, M., & Katzy, B. (2014). Cross-border innovation intermediaries – matchmaking across institutional contexts. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(6), 703–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madu, C. N. (1989). Transferring technology to developing countries—Critical factors for success. Long Range Planning, 22(4), 115–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik, K. (2002). Aiding the technology manager: a conceptual model for intra-firm technology transfer. Technovation, 22(7), 427–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2005). Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market. Research Policy, 34(7), 1058–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, J. C. G. (2014). El entorno universitario como factor en la transferencia de conocimientos a través de incubadoras de empresas. Entreciencias: Diálogos en la sociedad del conocimiento, 2(5), 227–244.

  • Matt, M., & Schaeffer, V. (2012). The Cooperative strategy of technology transfer offices: A longitudinal study. In D. B. Audretsch, E. E. Lehmann, A. N. Link, & A. Starnecker (Eds.), Technology transfer in a global economy (pp. 51–72). Boston, MA: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mejri, K., MacVaugh, J. A., & Tsagdis, D. (2018). Knowledge configurations of small and medium-sized knowledge-intensive firms in a developing economy: A knowledge-based view of business-to-business internationalization. Industrial Marketing Management, 71, 160–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K., McAdam, R., & McAdam, M. (2018). A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: Toward a research agenda. R&D Management, 48(1), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Min, J.-W., Vonortas, N. S., & Kim, Y. (2019). Commercialization of transferred public technologies. Technological Forecasting And Social Change, 138, 10–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Momaya, K. S. (2017). Scale-up and quality of ventures: exploring the role of international capabilities. International Journal of Global Business and Competitiveness (IJGBC).

  • Morisson, A. (2019). Innovation centres as anchor spaces of the’knowledge city’. Global Business & Economics Review, 21(3–4), 330–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munkongsujarit, S., & Jetter, A. J. (2013). The impact of social capital on the outcomes of innovation intermediation process. In 2013 proceedings of PICMET ’13: technology management in the IT-driven services (PICMET) (pp. 800–806). ieeexplore.ieee.org.

  • Nabin, M. H., Nguyen, X., & Sgro, P. M. (2013). Technology transfer, quality standards, and North-South trade. International Review of Law and Economics, 21(4), 783–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, M. M. (2017). Governance Failure in Light of Government 3.0: Foundations for Building Next Generation eGovernment Maturity Models. Public Administration and Information Technology, 63–109.

  • Noh, H., & Lee, S. (2019). Where technology transfer research originated and where it is going: A quantitative analysis of literature published between 1980 and 2015. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(3), 700–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D., & Ciesielska, M. (2019). Towards a framework for innovation orientation within business and management studies of Organizational Change Management.

  • O’Kane, C., Mangematin, V., Geoghegan, W., & Fitzgerald, C. (2015). University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy. Research Policy, 44(2), 421–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh, D.-S., & Yeom, I. (2012). Daedeok Innopolis in Korea: From science park to innovation cluster. World Technopolis Review, 1(2), 141–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, T., & Martins, M. F. (2011). Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), 110–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palaco, I., Park, M. J., Kim, S. K., & Rho, J. J. (2019). Public-private partnerships for e-government in developing countries: An early stage assessment framework. Evaluation and Program Planning, 72, 205–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, L., Rippa, P., Quinto, I., & Lazzarotti, V. (2016). Role of innovation intermediaries in open innovation practices: Differences between micro-small and medium-large firms. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 11(3), 377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, S., Liu, X., & Gao, T. (2017). Do emerging countries prefer local knowledge or distant knowledge? Spillover effect of university collaborations on local firms. Research Policy, 46(7), 1299–1311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radosevic, S. (1999). International technology transfer and catch-up in economic development, 284.

  • Ramon-Jeronimo, J. M., Florez-Lopez, R., & Araujo-Pinzon, P. (2019). Resource-based view and SMEs performance exporting through foreign intermediaries: The mediating effect of management controls. Sustainability: Science Practice and Policy, 11(12), 3241.

  • Rampersad, G., & Troshani, I. (2011). Bifocal technology adoption: A case study of a technology transfer tool. In PACIS (p. 153).

  • Rampersad, G., Quester, P., & Troshani, I. (2010). Examining network factors: Commitment, trust, coordination and harmony. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 25(7), 487–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rampersad, G., Troshani, I., & Plewa, C. (2012). IOS adoption in innovation networks: A case study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 112(9), 1366–1382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rigo, D. (2020). Global value chains and technology transfer: new evidence from developing countries. Review of World Economics.

  • Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Hardy, D. (2014). Technology and Industrial Parks in Emerging Countries: Panacea or Pipedream?

  • Rothaermel, F. T. (2002). Technological discontinuities and interfirm cooperation: What determines a startup’s attractiveness as alliance partner? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(4), 388–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roxas, S. A., Piroli, G., & Sorrentino, M. (2011). Efficiency and evaluation analysis of a network of technology transfer brokers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(1), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saggi, M. K., & Hoekman, K. E. (2004). Transfer of technology to developing countries: unilateral and multilateral policy options. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer, V., Öcalan-Özel, S., & Pénin, J. (2020). The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: A longitudinal approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45(1), 31–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, A. (2019). The startup supporting system in Austria and the impact of internationalization: A cross-sectoral analysis/submitted by Alexander Schneider. Universität Linz. Retrieved from https://epub.jku.at/obvulihs/content/titleinfo/3783100

  • Seck, A. (2012). International technology diffusion and economic growth: Explaining the spillover benefits to developing countries. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(4), 437–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secundo, G., Beer, C. D., & Passiante, G. (2016). Measuring university technology transfer efficiency: A maturity level approach. Measuring Business Excellence, 20(3), 42–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research, 104, 333–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J., & Hyysalo, S. (2008). Intermediaries, Users and social learning in technological innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(03), 295–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sung, T. K., Gibson, D. V., & Kang, B.-S. (2003). Characteristics of technology transfer in business ventures: The case of Daejeon. Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 70(5), 449–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teasley, R., & Robinson, R. (2013). Understanding technology transfer effectiveness in Japanese organizations: a test of contingency theory. Electronic Business, 12(9).

  • Teece, D. J. (2014). The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornatzky, L. G., Fleischer, M., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (1990). The processes of technological innovation. New York: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trott, P. (2008). Innovation management and new product development. New York: Pearson education.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Steen, J. T., Radbruch, L., Hertogh, C. M. P. M., de Boer, M. E., Hughes, J. C., Larkin, P., et al. (2014). White paper defining optimal palliative care in older people with dementia: A Delphi study. Palliative Medicine, 28(3), 197–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Winden, W., & Carvalho, L. (2019). Intermediation in public procurement of innovation: How Amsterdam’s startup-in-residence programme connects startups to urban challenges. Research Policy.

  • Vogel, C., Zwolinsky, S., Griffiths, C., Hobbs, M., Henderson, E., & Wilkins, E. (2019). A Delphi study to build consensus on the definition and use of big data in obesity research. International Journal of Obesity.

  • von der Gracht, H. A. (2012). Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: Review and implications for future quality assurance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(8), 1525–1536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., Lo, C., Chien, P., Chen, H., & Lo, S. (2013). The impact of relative centrality and technology diversity on inter-firm technological alliances. In 2013 proceedings of PICMET ’13: Technology management in the IT-driven services (PICMET) (pp. 2259–2270).

  • Waroonkun, T., & Stewart, R. A. (2008). Modeling the international technology transfer process in construction projects: evidence from Thailand. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 667–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44(8), 1407–1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winch, G. M., & Courtney, R. (2007). The organization of innovation brokers: An international review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(6), 747–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank Data. (2019). World Bank Country and Lending Groups. The World Bank. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups. Accessed 26 May 2019

  • Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 925–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedtwitz, M. von, von Zedtwitz, M., & Gassmann, O. (2002). Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: four different patterns of managing research and development. Research Policy.

  • Zhu, K., Kraemer, K. L., & Xu, S. (2006). The process of innovation assimilation by firms in different countries: a technology diffusion perspective on e-business. Management Science, 52(10), 1557–1576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by IP, SKK, MJP, and JJR. The first draft of the manuscript was written by IP. All authors commented on all versions of the manuscript and read and approved the final one.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ileana Palaco.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 5.

Table 5 Integration & synthesis of ITT intermediaries capabilities. Source: Own Elaboration based on sources

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Palaco, I., Kim, S., Park, M. et al. Exploring capabilities of international technology transfer intermediaries between emerging and developed countries. J Technol Transf 47, 307–352 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-021-09849-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-021-09849-2

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation