IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p5253-d550395.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relationship between Patents, Technology Transfer and Desorptive Capacity in Korean Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Youngseong Koo

    (Korea Agency for Infrastructure Technology Advancement, 286 Simin-Daero, Dongan-Gu, Anyang 14066, Gyeonggi-Do, Korea)

  • Keuntae Cho

    (Graduate School of Technology Management, Sungkyunkwan University, 2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu, Suwon 16419, Gyeonggi-Do, Korea)

Abstract

This study sought to examine the relationship between patent rights and technology transfer performances of Korean universities and to analyze the moderating effect of the desorptive capacity of industry-academic cooperation foundations. Through this, we study the impact of universities’ patents on both the number of licenses and the license incomes of the universities. We also examine the meaning of the desorptive capacity between them. Regression analysis and structural equation modeling are performed by using the number of patents registered as an independent variable, the number of licenses and license incomes as dependent variables and the desorptive capacity as a moderating variable. The analysis shows that the patent had a positive relationship with both the number of licenses and license incomes. Desorptive capacity had no significant effect between patents and the number of technology transfers. However, it is seen as having a moderating effect between patents and licensing fees from the technology transfers. This paper meaningfully illustrates the desorptive capacity of the industry-academic cooperation foundation from the perspective of outbound open innovation and analyzes the moderating effect of desorptive capacity in relation to patent rights and technology transfer performances.

Suggested Citation

  • Youngseong Koo & Keuntae Cho, 2021. "The Relationship between Patents, Technology Transfer and Desorptive Capacity in Korean Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5253-:d:550395
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5253/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5253/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    2. Olaya-Escobar, Erika Sofía & Berbegal-Mirabent, Jasmina & Alegre, Inés, 2020. "Exploring the relationship between service quality of technology transfer offices and researchers’ patenting activity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W, 2001. "To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 99-114, January.
    4. Drivas, Kyriakos & Economidou, Claire & Karamanis, Dimitris & Zank, Arleen, 2014. "Academic Patents and Technology Transfer," MPRA Paper 57476, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Ulrich Lichtenthaler & Eckhard Lichtenthaler, 2009. "A Capability‐Based Framework for Open Innovation: Complementing Absorptive Capacity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(8), pages 1315-1338, December.
    6. Balzhan Orazbayeva & Carolin Plewa & Todd Davey & Victoria Galán-Muros, 2019. "The future of University-Business Cooperation: research and practice priorities," Post-Print hal-02880384, HAL.
    7. Min, Jae-Woong & Vonortas, Nicholas S. & Kim, YoungJun, 2019. "Commercialization of transferred public technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 10-20.
    8. Catalina Martinez & Lydia Bares, 2018. "The link between technology transfer and international extension of university patents: Evidence from Spain," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 827-842.
    9. Ashish Arora & Alfonso Gambardella, 2010. "Ideas for rent: an overview of markets for technology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 775-803, June.
    10. Maresch, Daniela & Fink, Matthias & Harms, Rainer, 2016. "When patents matter: The impact of competition and patent age on the performance contribution of intellectual property rights protection," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 57, pages 14-20.
    11. Joshua B. Powers, 2003. "Commercializing Academic Research," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(1), pages 26-50, January.
    12. Powers, Joshua B. & McDougall, Patricia 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, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 291-311, May.
    13. Nicole Ziegler & Frauke Ruether & Martin Bader & Oliver Gassmann, 2013. "Creating value through external intellectual property commercialization: a desorptive capacity view," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(6), pages 930-949, December.
    14. Di Gregorio, Dante & Shane, Scott, 2003. "Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 209-227, February.
    15. Santoro, Gabriele & Vrontis, Demetris & Thrassou, Alkis & Dezi, Luca, 2018. "The Internet of Things: Building a knowledge management system for open innovation and knowledge management capacity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 347-354.
    16. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2002. "Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 90-104, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Worasak Klongthong & Veera Muangsin & Chupun Gowanit & Nongnuj Muangsin, 2021. "A Patent Analysis to Identify Emergent Topics and Convergence Fields: A Case Study of Chitosan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-28, August.
    2. Sylvia Novillo-Villegas & Ricardo Ayala-Andrade & Juan Pablo Lopez-Cox & Javier Salazar-Oyaneder & Patricia Acosta-Vargas, 2022. "A Roadmap for Innovation Capacity in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Sylvia Novillo-Villegas & Patricia Acosta-Vargas & Christian Cruz-Boada & Mateo Garzon & Andre Marin-Dett & Wendy Anzules-Falcones, 2022. "Sustaining the Path for Innovation Capability from a Developing Country Perspective: A Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-26, October.

    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. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    2. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2016. "Determinants Of Financial Rewards From Industry–University Collaboration In South Korea," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(07), pages 1-26, October.
    3. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Yang, Phil Y. & Chen, Ming-Huei, 2009. "The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 936-946, July.
    4. Tina C. Ambos & Kristiina Mäkelä & Julian Birkinshaw & Pablo D'Este, 2008. "When Does University Research Get Commercialized? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1424-1447, December.
    5. Soares, Thiago J. & Torkomian, Ana L.V., 2021. "TTO's staff and technology transfer: Examining the effect of employees' individual capabilities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Temel, Serdal & Dabić, Marina & Murat Ar, Ilker & Howells, Jeremy & Ali Mert, & Yesilay, Rustem Baris, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between university innovation intermediaries and patenting performance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    7. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    8. Battaglia, Daniele & Landoni, Paolo & Rizzitelli, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational structures for external growth of University Technology Transfer Offices: An explorative analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 45-56.
    9. Berna Beyhan & M. Teoman Pamukçu & Erkan Erdil, 2011. "Individual and Organizational Aspects of University-Industry Relations in Nanotechnology: The Turkish Case," STPS Working Papers 1106, STPS - Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jun 2011.
    10. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2011. "Does inventor ownership encourage university research-derived entrepreneurship? A six university comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1100-1112, October.
    11. Hsu, David W.L. & Shen, Yung-Chi & Yuan, Benjamin J.C. & Chou, Chiyan James, 2015. "Toward successful commercialization of university technology: Performance drivers of university technology transfer in Taiwan," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 25-39.
    12. Guerrero, Maribel & Cunningham, James A. & Urbano, David, 2015. "Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 748-764.
    13. Scott Shane & Sharon Dolmans & Joseph Jankowski & Isabelle Reymen & A. Romme, 2015. "Academic entrepreneurship: Which inventors do technology licensing officers prefer for spinoffs?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 273-292, April.
    14. Marcel Hülsbeck & Erik Lehmann & Alexander Starnecker, 2013. "Performance of technology transfer offices in Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 199-215, June.
    15. Nugent, Annita & Chan, Ho Fai, 2023. "Outsourcing university research commercialization to a sophisticated technology transfer office: Evidence from Australian universities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    16. Powers, Joshua B. & McDougall, Patricia, 2005. "Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1028-1042, September.
    17. Phil Yihsing Yang & Yuan-Chieh Chang, 2010. "Academic research commercialization and knowledge production and diffusion: the moderating effects of entrepreneurial commitment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 403-421, May.
    18. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    19. Christopher S. Hayter & Andrew J. Nelson & Stephanie Zayed & Alan C. O’Connor, 2018. "Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1039-1082, August.
    20. Lee Davis & Maria Larsen & Peter Lotz, 2011. "Scientists’ perspectives concerning the effects of university patenting on the conduct of academic research in the life sciences," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 14-37, February.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5253-:d:550395. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.