IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i8p6550-d1121986.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

University Technology Transfer from a Knowledge-Flow Approach—Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • José Bestier Padilla Bejarano

    (Program in Electronic Instrumentation Technology, Faculty of Basic Sciences and Technologies, Universidad del Quindío, Armenia 030004, Colombia
    Doctoral Program in Management of Technology and Innovation, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellin 050031, Colombia)

  • Jhon Wilder Zartha Sossa

    (Department of Engineering, Faculty of Agro-Industrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050031, Colombia)

  • Carlos Ocampo-López

    (Centro de Estudios y de Investigación en Biotecnología (CIBIOT), Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050031, Colombia)

  • Margarita Ramírez-Carmona

    (Centro de Estudios y de Investigación en Biotecnología (CIBIOT), Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050031, Colombia)

Abstract

This study aims to review and synthesize the rapidly evolving literature on technology transfer from universities, and the concepts and models included in it, from a knowledge-flow approach to find the factors contributing to its performance. This article provides a perspective on recent work, focusing on empirical studies on technology transfer in universities conducted in the last 32 years from a knowledge-based vision. The study was carried out from a systematic literature review in the Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink databases on 135 articles selected and evaluated by peers from critical surveillance factors such as technology transfer, knowledge flow, and university–industry relationship, among others. It was possible to identify 75 factors that, from a knowledge-based vision and specifically from a knowledge-flow approach, permit and contribute to the performance of technology transfer generated from research processes in universities. We classified studies into four categories according to their approaches, each with their dimensions and factors: management of knowledge, resources and capabilities, management of technological transfer, and the university–industry relationship. This classification permitted not only identification but also the systematization of the different factors and related authors that, from a knowledge-flow approach, contribute to the performance of technological transfers in universities, reflecting their efficiency and effectiveness. In this respect, absorption capacity and open innovation are topics which are worthy of exploration.

Suggested Citation

  • José Bestier Padilla Bejarano & Jhon Wilder Zartha Sossa & Carlos Ocampo-López & Margarita Ramírez-Carmona, 2023. "University Technology Transfer from a Knowledge-Flow Approach—Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6550-:d:1121986
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6550/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6550/
    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. Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2007. "National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 95-119.
    3. onder Nomaler & Bart Verspagen, 2008. "Knowledge Flows, Patent Citations and the Impact of Science on Technology," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 339-366.
    4. Jenny Marcela Sánchez & Javier E. Medina & Andrés Mauricio León, 2007. "Publicación internacional de patentes por organizaciones e inventores de origen colombiano," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, December.
    5. Yu Yu & Yao Chen & Qinfen Shi, 2018. "Colored Petri Net Model of Knowledge Flow Based on Knowledge Life Cycle," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Strategy and Performance of Knowledge Flow, chapter 0, pages 83-94, Springer.
    6. Thursby, Jerry G. & Kemp, Sukanya, 2002. "Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 109-124, January.
    7. Calin S. Vac & Avram Fitiu, 2017. "Building Sustainable Development through Technology Transfer in a Romanian University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Christoph Grimpe & Heide Fier, 2010. "Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 637-650, December.
    9. 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).
    10. Baglieri, Daniela & Baldi, Francesco & Tucci, Christopher L., 2018. "University technology transfer office business models: One size does not fit all," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 51-63.
    11. Jiaming Jiang & Yu Zhao & Junshi Feng, 2022. "University–Industry Technology Transfer: Empirical Findings from Chinese Industrial Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Valentina Morandi, 2013. "The management of industry–university joint research projects: how do partners coordinate and control R&D activities?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 69-92, April.
    13. Schut, Marc & Leeuwis, Cees & Thiele, Graham, 2020. "Science of Scaling: Understanding and guiding the scaling of innovation for societal outcomes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Raphael Amit & Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 1993. "Abstract," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 33-46, January.
    15. Paola M. A. Paniccia & Silvia Baiocco, 2018. "Co-Evolution of the University Technology Transfer: Towards a Sustainability-Oriented Industry: Evidence from Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-29, December.
    16. 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.
    17. Amesse, Fernand & Cohendet, P., 2001. "Technology transfer revisited from the perspective of the knowledge-based economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1459-1478, December.
    18. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    22. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    23. Lili Wang & Zexia Li, 2021. "Knowledge flows from public science to industrial technologies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1232-1255, August.
    24. Colyvas, Jeannette A., 2007. "From divergent meanings to common practices: The early institutionalization of technology transfer in the life sciences at Stanford University," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 456-476, May.
    25. 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.
    26. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    27. Giorgio Calcagnini & Ilario Favaretto, 2016. "Models of university technology transfer: analyses and policies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 655-660, August.
    28. Juan Jesus Arenas & Domingo González, 2018. "Technology Transfer Models and Elements in the University-Industry Collaboration," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, June.
    29. Annamaria Demarinis Loiotile & Francesco De Nicolò & Adriana Agrimi & Loredana Bellantuono & Marianna La Rocca & Alfonso Monaco & Ester Pantaleo & Sabina Tangaro & Nicola Amoroso & Roberto Bellotti, 2022. "Best Practices in Knowledge Transfer: Insights from Top Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    30. Yu Yu & Yao Chen & Qinfen Shi, 2018. "Strategy and Performance of Knowledge Flow," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-3-319-77926-3, September.
    31. 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.
    32. Dalmarco, Gustavo & Hulsink, Willem & Blois, Guilherme V., 2018. "Creating entrepreneurial universities in an emerging economy: Evidence from Brazil," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 99-111.
    33. Bernardina Algieri & Antonio Aquino & Marianna Succurro, 2013. "Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: the case of Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 382-400, August.
    34. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    35. Branco Ponomariov & P. Craig Boardman, 2008. "The effect of informal industry contacts on the time university scientists allocate to collaborative research with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 301-313, June.
    36. 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.
    37. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    38. Penrose, Edith, 2009. "The Theory of the Growth of the Firm," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 4, number 9780199573844.
    39. 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.
    40. 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.
    41. Lee, Yong S, 2000. "The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An Empirical Assessment," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 111-133, June.
    42. Lundquist, Gary, 2003. "A Rich Vision of Technology Transfer Technology Value Management," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(3-4), pages 265-284, August.
    43. Janet Bercovitz & Maryann Feldman, 2006. "Entpreprenerial Universities and Technology Transfer: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic Development," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 175-188, January.
    44. Dosi, Giovanni & Llerena, Patrick & Labini, Mauro Sylos, 2006. "The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called `European Paradox'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1450-1464, December.
    45. Jain, Sanjay & George, Gerard & Maltarich, Mark, 2009. "Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 922-935, July.
    46. Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2017. "How can academic innovation performance in university–industry collaboration be improved?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 210-215.
    47. Argote, Linda & Ingram, Paul & Levine, John M. & Moreland, Richard L., 2000. "Knowledge Transfer in Organizations: Learning from the Experience of Others," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-8, May.
    48. Fernández-Esquinas, Manuel & Pinto, Hugo & Yruela, Manuel Pérez & Pereira, Tiago Santos, 2016. "Tracing the flows of knowledge transfer: Latent dimensions and determinants of university–industry interactions in peripheral innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 266-279.
    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. Antonio O. Martín-Martín & Victor A. Bañuls & Rocío Ruiz-Benítez, 2023. "Technology Transfer Assessment in Regional Business Contexts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-23, July.

    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. 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.
    3. Berna Beyhan & Derya Findik, 2018. "Student and graduate entrepreneurship: ambidextrous universities create more nascent entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1346-1374, October.
    4. James A. Cunningham & Paul O’Reilly, 2018. "Macro, meso and micro perspectives of technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 545-557, June.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. Conor O’Kane & James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Sara Walton, 2021. "The brokering role of technology transfer offices within entrepreneurial ecosystems: an investigation of macro–meso–micro factors," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1814-1844, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Fischer, Bruno Brandão & Moraes, Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de & Schaeffer, Paola Rücker, 2019. "Universities' institutional settings and academic entrepreneurship: Notes from a developing country," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 243-252.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    12. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    13. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Esteban Lafuente & Jasmina Berbegal-Mirabent, 2019. "Assessing the productivity of technology transfer offices: an analysis of the relevance of aspiration performance and portfolio complexity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 778-801, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Laura Kreiling & Ahmed Bounfour, 2020. "A practice-based maturity model for holistic TTO performance management: development and initial use," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1718-1747, December.
    19. Ryan, Paul & Geoghegan, Will & Hilliard, Rachel, 2018. "The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 15-27.
    20. Markus A. Kirchberger & Larissa Pohl, 2016. "Technology commercialization: a literature review of success factors and antecedents across different contexts," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 1077-1112, October.

    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:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6550-:d:1121986. 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.