IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02554515.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

La stratégie d'accélération du transfert de technologie et les attentes des parties prenantes : une étude empirique dans la région Languedoc-Roussillon

Author

Listed:
  • Walid A Nakara

    (MRM - Montpellier Research in Management - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier (GSCM) - Montpellier Business School - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Laurent Garnier

    (OSUR - Observatoire des Sciences de l'Univers de Rennes - UR - Université de Rennes - INSU - CNRS - Institut national des sciences de l'Univers - UR2 - Université de Rennes 2 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

Abstract

Cette recherche a pour objet, dans le contexte de la nouvelle création des Sociétés d'Accélération du Transfert de Technologie (SATT), d'étudier la stratégie et attente des parties prenantes du transfert de technologie : chercheurs, dirigeants et entrepreneurs, organismes de transfert de technologie ; d'en identifier les convergences et divergences, de définir des axes de rapprochement et d'amélioration des processus existants. Pour y parvenir, et en mobilisant le cadre théorique du modèle de la « triple hélice », nous avons mené vingt-deux entretiens semi-directifs avec des chercheurs académiques, organismes intervenant dans le transfert de technologie et dirigeants d'entreprises innovantes. Il ressort de l'analyse des résultats que l'amélioration de l'efficacité du transfert de technologie repose sur les compétences des organismes chargés de sa mise en oeuvre, en particulier sur leur capacité à détecter les inventions susceptibles d'avoir un avenir industriel et à mobiliser les moyens financiers nécessaires à leur développement. Mais cette étude montre que le succès dépend aussi de l'évolution des mentalités des acteurs, d'une meilleure prise de conscience des intérêts communs, traduite par le développement de logiques de partage, dans le cadre de partenariats équilibrés et équitables, respectant les spécificités de chacun. A cet égard, les SATT auront également une mission de facilitateur, notamment en communiquant sur les bonnes pratiques et les succès obtenus. Mots-clefs Transfert de technologie, valorisation de la recherche, organisme de transfert de technologie, SATT, recherche publique, spin-off universitaire.

Suggested Citation

  • Walid A Nakara & Laurent Garnier, 2015. "La stratégie d'accélération du transfert de technologie et les attentes des parties prenantes : une étude empirique dans la région Languedoc-Roussillon," Post-Print hal-02554515, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02554515
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02554515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02554515/document
    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. Frédérique Pallez, 2014. "La recherche partenariale est-elle soluble dans les politiques publiques de recherche ?," Post-Print hal-00952432, HAL.
    3. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University-Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 233-245, Springer.
    4. 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.
    5. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University--Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 115-127, January.
    6. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    7. Pablo D'Este & Surya Mahdi & Andy Neely, 2010. "Academic Entrepreneurship: What are the Factors Shaping the Capacity of Academic Researchers to Identify and Exploit Entrepreneurial Opportunities?," DRUID Working Papers 10-05, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    8. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lisa Craiut & Constantin Bungau & Tudor Bungau & Cristian Grava & Pavel Otrisal & Andrei-Flavius Radu, 2022. "Technology Transfer, Sustainability, and Development, Worldwide and in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-33, November.
    2. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2016. "Knowledge Creates Markets: The influence of entrepreneurial support and patent rights on academic entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 131-146.
    3. Mario BENASSI & Matteo LANDONI & Francesco RENTOCCHINI, 2017. "University Management Practices and Academic Spin-offs," Departmental Working Papers 2017-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    4. Christian Fisch & Tobias Hassel & Philipp Sandner & Joern Block, 2015. "University patenting: a comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 318-345, April.
    5. Berbegal-Mirabent, Jasmina & Sánchez García, José Luís & Ribeiro-Soriano, D. Enrique, 2015. "University–industry partnerships for the provision of R&D services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1407-1413.
    6. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2015. "Individual versus institutional ownership of university-discovered inventions," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-007, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. 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).
    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. Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S. & Van Fleet, David D., 2011. "Public science and public innovation: Assessing the relationship between patenting at U.S. National Laboratories and the Bayh-Dole Act," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1094-1099, October.
    10. Federica Rossi & Ainurul Rosli, 2013. "Indicators of university-industry knowledge transfer performance and their implications for universities: Evidence from the UK’s HE-BCI survey," Working Papers 13, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Aug 2013.
    11. Rippa, Pierluigi & Secundo, Giustina, 2019. "Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 900-911.
    12. Patrick S. W. Fong & Xuhua Chang & Qiang Chen, 2018. "Faculty patent assignment in the Chinese mainland: evidence from the top 35 patent application universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 69-95, February.
    13. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    14. Victoria Galán-Muros & Peter Sijde & Peter Groenewegen & Thomas Baaken, 2017. "Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 184-205, February.
    15. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    16. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    17. 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.
    18. Alan Hughes & Michael Kitson, 2012. "Pathways to Impact and the Strategic Role of Universities," Working Papers wp435, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    19. Yung-Chi Shen, 2017. "Identifying the key barriers and their interrelationships impeding the university technology transfer in Taiwan: a multi-stakeholder perspective," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2865-2884, November.
    20. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-02554515. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.