IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0072268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Survey of the Barriers Associated with Academic-based Cancer Research Commercialization

Author

Listed:
  • Nathan L Vanderford
  • L Todd Weiss
  • Heidi L Weiss

Abstract

Commercialization within the academic setting is associated with many challenges and barriers. Previous studies investigating these challenges/barriers have, in general, broadly focused on multiple disciplines and, oftentimes, several institutions simultaneously. The goal of the study presented here was to analyze a range of barriers that may be broadly associated with commercializing academic-based cancer research. This goal was addressed via a study of the barriers associated with cancer research commercialization at the University of Kentucky (UK). To this end, a research instrument in the form of an electronic survey was developed. General demographic information was collected on study participants and two research questions were addressed: 1) What are the general barriers inhibiting cancer research commercialization at UK? and 2) Would mitigation of the barriers potentially enhance faculty engagement in commercialization activities? Descriptive and statistical analysis of the data reveal that multiple barriers likely inhibit cancer research commercialization at UK with expense, time, infrastructure, and lack of industry partnerships being among the most commonly cited factors. The potential alleviation of these factors in addition to revised University policies/procedures, risk mitigation, more emphasis on commercialization by academia research field, and increased information on how to commercialize significantly correlated with the potential for increased commercialization activity. Furthermore, multivariate logistic regression modeling demonstrated that research commercialization would incrementally increase as barriers to the process are removed and that PhD-holding respondents and respondents in commercialization-supportive research fields would be more likely to commercialize their research upon barrier removal. Overall, as with other disciplines, these data suggest that for innovations derived from academic cancer-research to move more effectively and efficiently into the marketplace, university administrators and external agents, such as policymakers, need to address what are well-documented and defined issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathan L Vanderford & L Todd Weiss & Heidi L Weiss, 2013. "A Survey of the Barriers Associated with Academic-based Cancer Research Commercialization," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-7, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0072268
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0072268
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0072268&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0072268?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
    2. O'Shea, Rory P. & Allen, Thomas J. & Chevalier, Arnaud & Roche, Frank, 2005. "Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 994-1009, September.
    3. Raphael Klein & Uzi Haan & Albert Goldberg, 2010. "Overcoming obstacles encountered on the way to commercialize university IP," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 671-679, December.
    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. Michaela Trippl & Franz Tödtling, 2006. "From the ivory tower to the market place? The changing role of knowledge organisations in spurring the development of biotechnology clusters in Austria," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2006_07, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    2. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Luisa Mota, 2012. "A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 719-743, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Yagüe-Perales, Rosa M. & March-Chordà, Isidre, 2012. "Performance analysis of research spin-offs in the Spanish biotechnology industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 1782-1789.
    5. 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.
    6. Riccardo Fini & Kun Fu & Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen & Mike Wright, 2017. "Institutional determinants of university spin-off quantity and quality: a longitudinal, multilevel, cross-country study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 361-391, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Yuan-Cheih Chang & Phil Yihsing Yang & Tung-Fei Tsai-Lin & Hui-Ru Chi, 2011. "How University Departmens respond to the Rise of Academic Entrepreneurship? The Pasteur's Quadrant Explanation," DRUID Working Papers 11-07, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    9. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Yang, Phil Yihsing & Martin, Ben R. & Chi, Hui-Ru & Tsai-Lin, Tung-Fei, 2016. "Entrepreneurial universities and research ambidexterity: A multilevel analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 7-21.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Kyriakos Drivas & Andreas Panagopoulos & Stelios Rozakis, 2018. "Instigating entrepreneurship to a university in an adverse entrepreneurial landscape," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 966-985, August.
    13. James A. Cunningham & Erik E. Lehmann & Matthias Menter & Nikolaus Seitz, 2019. "The impact of university focused technology transfer policies on regional innovation and entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1451-1475, October.
    14. Chiara Marzocchi & Fumi Kitagawa & Mabel Sánchez-Barrioluengo, 2019. "Evolving missions and university entrepreneurship: academic spin-offs and graduate start-ups in the entrepreneurial society," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 167-188, February.
    15. Radzivon Marozau & Maribel Guerrero & David Urbano, 2021. "Impacts of Universities in Different Stages of Economic Development," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, March.
    16. 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.
    17. Jue Wang & Philip Shapira, 2012. "Partnering with universities: a good choice for nanotechnology start-up firms?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 197-215, February.
    18. Jason Coupet & Yuhao Ba, 2022. "Benchmarking university technology transfer performance with external research funding: a stochastic frontier analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 605-620, April.
    19. Zhou, Ruoying & Tang, Puay, 2020. "The role of university Knowledge Transfer Offices: Not just commercialize research outputs!," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    20. Bradley, Samantha R. & Hayter, Christopher S. & Link, Albert N., 2013. "Models and Methods of University Technology Transfer," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-10, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.

    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:plo:pone00:0072268. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.