IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ibrjnl/v10y2017i4p69-76.html

How Much Am I Selling It for? Approaches and Methods of Patents Valuation in Technology Transfer

Author

Listed:
  • Gustavo Da Cruz
  • Danilo Moreira Jabur
  • Franklin Mendonça Goês Junior

Abstract

Patent has assumed a protagonism in the transformation of knowledge and technology to allow some kind of economic exploration. However, researchers have some problems to define the correct value of their patent to sell it to industries or governments. The purpose of this paper is to explore the approaches and methods of patents valuation, especially in technology transfer process between universities-industries. It was made the review and examination cost-based, market-based and income-based approaches and their corresponding methods of patents valuation: Incurred-cost, costing, comparison-based and real options. Patent valuation will be presented to researchers, managers and other actors involved with innovation with the aim of creating at the universities their own valuation model focused on a better technology transfer process within industries, and consequently generate additional profits to the university third mission.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustavo Da Cruz & Danilo Moreira Jabur & Franklin Mendonça Goês Junior, 2017. "How Much Am I Selling It for? Approaches and Methods of Patents Valuation in Technology Transfer," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(4), pages 69-76, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ibrjnl:v:10:y:2017:i:4:p:69-76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/view/66088/36288
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/view/66088
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Taheri, Mozhdeh & van Geenhuizen, Marina, 2016. "Teams' boundary-spanning capacity at university: Performance of technology projects in commercialization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 31-43.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Markman, Gideon D. & Gianiodis, Peter T. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B., 2005. "Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1058-1075, September.
    5. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2005. "Exploring the Patent Explosion," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 195-208, Springer.
    6. Mike Wright & Sue Birley & Simon Mosey, 2004. "Entrepreneurship and University Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 235-246, August.
    7. Chapple, Wendy & Lockett, Andy & Siegel, Donald & Wright, Mike, 2005. "Assessing the relative performance of U.K. university technology transfer offices: parametric and non-parametric evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 369-384, April.
    8. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    9. Norman Carte, 2005. "The Maximum Achievable Profit Method Of Patent Valuation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(02), pages 135-151.
    10. Richard Jensen & Marie Thursby, 1998. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Tale of University Licensing," NBER Working Papers 6698, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Thursby, Jerry G & Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie C, 2001. "Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 59-72, January.
    12. David Audretsch & Erik Lehmann & Mike Wright, 2014. "Technology transfer in a global economy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 301-312, June.
    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. Conor O'Kane & Vincent Mangematin & Will Geoghegan & Ciara Fitzgerald, 2015. "University Technology Transfer offices : the search for identity to build legimacy," Post-Print hal-01072998, HAL.
    5. Jisun Kim & Tugrul Daim, 2014. "A new approach to measuring time-lags in technology licensing: study of U.S. academic research institutions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(5), pages 748-773, October.
    6. Bozeman, Barry & Rimes, Heather & Youtie, Jan, 2015. "The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 34-49.
    7. Nabila Abid & James A Cunningham & José-Luis Perea-Vicente, 2024. "A thematic review of 45 years of The Journal of Technology Transfer," Post-Print hal-04980007, HAL.
    8. 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.
    9. Forough Zarea & Evan J. Douglas & Martin Obschonka & Per Davidsson & David B. Audretsch & Dietmar W. Hutmacher, 2025. "When the marketplace comes to the research laboratory: technology transfer efficiency of innovation-driven publicly funded research centers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 2556-2586, December.
    10. Fernández-Alles, Mariluz & Rodríguez-González, Tamara & Villanueva-Flores, Mercedes & Díaz-Fernández, Mirta, 2025. "Impact of the ambidexterity of University Technology Transfer Offices on their performance: The Spanish context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    11. O’Kane, Conor, 2018. "Technology transfer executives' backwards integration: An examination of interactions between university technology transfer executives and principal investigators," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 64-77.
    12. 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.
    13. Nabila Abid & James A. Cunningham & José-Luis Perea-Vicente, 2025. "A thematic review of 45 years of The Journal of Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 1739-1784, August.
    14. Arianna Martinelli & Martin Meyer & Nick Tunzelmann, 2008. "Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 259-283, June.
    15. Charlotta Dahlborg & Danielle Lewensohn & Rickard Danell & Carl Johan Sundberg, 2017. "To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 538-563, June.
    16. 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.
    17. Taouaf, Ilham & Elyoussoufi Attou, Omar & El Ganich, Said & Arouch, Moha, 2021. "The Technology Transfer Office (TTO): Toward a Viable Model for Universities in Morocco," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    18. 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.
    19. Lee, Kyootai & Jung, Hyun Ju, 2021. "Does TTO capability matter in commercializing university technology? Evidence from longitudinal data in South Korea," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    20. James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Chris Young, 2017. "A review of qualitative case methods trends and themes used in technology transfer research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 923-956, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:ibrjnl:v:10:y:2017:i:4:p:69-76. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.