IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/intemj/v15y2019i3d10.1007_s11365-018-0555-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cash, community and coordination: the triple-C categorisation of technology transfer office organisational philosophy

Author

Listed:
  • Jasmine Meysman

    (University of Antwerp)

  • Sven H. Cleyn

    (Imec)

  • Johan Braet

    (University of Antwerp)

Abstract

Although Technology Transfer as a research topic has become more and more popular, the mission and vision statements of technology transfer offices (TTOs) and the impact they have on the technology transfer processes leading to the creation of spin-offs, is still unfamiliar terrain. As mission and vision are incorporated into the operational philosophy of a TTO, this paper aims to find out what operational philosophies currently exist and if they can be aggregated into a typology. An empirical study was performed through a survey of 51 European TTOs, representing different academic disciplines and affiliations. The results shows that currently, three operational philosophy types exist within European TTOs: Cash, Community and Cooperation. Consequently, the degree to which the licensing negotiation strategies for the creation of spin-offs matched the typology that TTOs proclaimed to adhere to was studied. The results show that, besides mission and vision, also the risk averseness of TTOs plays a major role in the operational philosophy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jasmine Meysman & Sven H. Cleyn & Johan Braet, 2019. "Cash, community and coordination: the triple-C categorisation of technology transfer office organisational philosophy," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 815-835, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:intemj:v:15:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11365-018-0555-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11365-018-0555-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11365-018-0555-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11365-018-0555-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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. Federico Munari & Martina Pasquini & Laura Toschi, 2015. "From the lab to the stock market? The characteristics and impact of university-oriented seed funds in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 948-975, December.
    3. Véronique Schaeffer & Mireille Matt, 2016. "Development of academic entrepreneurship in a non-mature context: the role of the university as a hub-organisation," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(9-10), pages 724-745, October.
    4. Leo Paul Dana & Teresa E. Dana, 2005. "Expanding the scope of methodologies used in entrepreneurship research," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1), pages 79-88.
    5. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    6. Alessandro Muscio, 2010. "What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 181-202, April.
    7. Conti, Annamaria & Gaule, Patrick, 2011. "Is the US outperforming Europe in university technology licensing? A new perspective on the European Paradox," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 123-135, February.
    8. Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2007. "Intellectual property: the assessment," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 529-540, Winter.
    9. David Audretsch & Rosa Caiazza, 2016. "Technology transfer and entrepreneurship: cross-national analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1247-1259, December.
    10. Donald S. Siegel & Reinhilde Veugelers & Mike Wright, 2007. "Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 640-660, Winter.
    11. Annelore Huyghe & Mirjam Knockaert & Mike Wright & Evila Piva, 2014. "Technology transfer offices as boundary spanners in the pre-spin-off process: the case of a hybrid model," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 289-307, August.
    12. Tsvi Vinig & David Lips, 2015. "Measuring the performance of university technology transfer using meta data approach: the case of Dutch universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1034-1049, December.
    13. Markman, Gideon D. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B. & Gianiodis, Peter T., 2005. "Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 241-263, March.
    14. Colm O’Gorman & Orla Byrne & Dipti Pandya, 2008. "How scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 23-43, February.
    15. S. Desmidt & A. Prinzie, 2009. "Does your mission statement have any value? An explorative analysis of the effectiveness of mission statements from a communication perspective," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 09/568, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    16. Christopher Kenneth, Mark C. Bart Baetz, 1998. "The Relationship Between Mission Statements and Firm Performance: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(6), pages 823-853, November.
    17. Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
    18. Bray, Michael J. & Lee, James N., 2000. "University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 385-392.
    19. David J. Jefferson & Magali Maida & Alexander Farkas & Monica Alandete-Saez & Alan B. Bennett, 2017. "Technology transfer in the Americas: common and divergent practices among major research universities and public sector institutions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1307-1333, December.
    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. Thang Nguyen & Lan Nguyen & Scott Bryant & Hieu Nguyen, 2020. "What Motivates Scientists in Emerging Economies to Become Entrepreneurs? Evidence from Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.

    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. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    2. 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.
    3. Annelore Huyghe & Mirjam Knockaert & Evila Piva & Mike Wright, 2016. "Are researchers deliberately bypassing the technology transfer office? An analysis of TTO awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 589-607, October.
    4. Daniela Bolzani & Federico Munari & Einar Rasmussen & Laura Toschi, 2021. "Technology transfer offices as providers of science and technology entrepreneurship education," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 335-365, April.
    5. Brantnell, Anders & Baraldi, Enrico, 2022. "Understanding the roles and involvement of technology transfer offices in the commercialization of university research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    6. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    7. Insu Cho & Young Hoon Kwak & Jaehyeon Jun, 2019. "Sustainable Idea Development Mechanism in University Technology Commercialization (UTC): Perspectives from Dynamic Capabilities Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Peter T. Gianiodis & William R. Meek, 2020. "Entrepreneurial education for the entrepreneurial university: a stakeholder perspective," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1167-1195, August.
    9. Anja Schoen & Bruno Pottelsberghe de la Potterie & Joachim Henkel, 2014. "Governance typology of universities’ technology transfer processes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 435-453, June.
    10. Kadigia Faccin & Christle Beer & Bibiana Volkmer Martins & Grabriela Zanandrea & Neta Kela & Corne Schutte, 2022. "What really matters for TTOs efficiency? An analysis of TTOs in developed and developing economies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1135-1161, August.
    11. Holgersson, Marcus & Aaboen, Lise, 2019. "A literature review of intellectual property management in technology transfer offices: From appropriation to utilization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    12. Soares, Thiago J. & Torkomian, Ana L.V. & Nagano, Marcelo Seido, 2020. "University regulations, regional development and technology transfer: The case of Brazil," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    13. 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).
    14. Alejandro Bengoa & Amaia Maseda & Txomin Iturralde & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1514-1550, October.
    15. 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).
    16. Alessandro Muscio, 2010. "What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 181-202, April.
    17. Giuri, Paola & Munari, Federico & Scandura, Alessandra & Toschi, Laura, 2019. "The strategic orientation of universities in knowledge transfer activities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 261-278.
    18. Choi, Haneul & Yoon, Hyunjung & Siegel, Donald & Waldman, David A. & Mitchell, Marie S., 2022. "Assessing differences between university and federal laboratory postdoctoral scientists in technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    19. José L. González-Pernía & Graciela Kuechle & Iñaki Peña-Legazkue, 2013. "An Assessment of the Determinants of University Technology Transfer," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 27(1), pages 6-17, February.
    20. 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.

    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:spr:intemj:v:15:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11365-018-0555-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.