IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v16y2025i2d10.1007_s13132-024-02171-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Technology Maturity Level in the Occurrence of University Technology Transfer

Author

Listed:
  • Malcolm S. Townes

    (Saint Louis University)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a study aimed at understanding how technology maturity level influences the incidence of university technology transfer to the private sector. The study examined the topic from the perspective of private sector organizations. It used data from a random sample of patent applications filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and a theoretically guided sampling of multiple cases of private sector organizations that contemplated obtaining and assimilating technologies created at universities in the United States. The patent application data were analyzed using nonparametric statistical techniques and the case data were analyzed using qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). The findings of the study suggest that the typical maturity level of technologies created at U.S. universities is a TRL-5 or lower on the NASA technology readiness level (TRL) scale. A technology maturity level of TRL-6 or higher is likely an insufficient but necessary part of at least one unnecessary but sufficient configuration of conditions that tends to result in the occurrence of university technology transfer. However, under certain circumstances, a technology maturity level of at least TRL-6 could be a sufficient but unnecessary condition for the occurrence of university technology transfer. These findings have several important implications. First, they provide support for the notion that university technology transfer is subject to causal complexity. Moreover, it may be possible to increase the incidence of university technology transfer in the United States by implementing public policy and practices that explicitly take technology maturity level into consideration.

Suggested Citation

  • Malcolm S. Townes, 2025. "The Role of Technology Maturity Level in the Occurrence of University Technology Transfer," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(2), pages 10685-10757, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:16:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s13132-024-02171-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-024-02171-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13132-024-02171-w
    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/s13132-024-02171-w?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Heisey & Sarah Adelman, 2011. "Research expenditures, technology transfer activity, and university licensing revenue," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 38-60, February.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773, June.
    6. Radu Munteanu, 2012. "Stage of development and licensing university inventions," International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20.
    7. Nick Yeung, 2019. "Forcing PhD students to publish is bad for science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(10), pages 1036-1036, October.
    8. Dolmans, Sharon A.M. & Shane, Scott & Jankowski, Joseph & Reymen, Isabelle M.M.J. & Romme, A. Georges L., 2016. "The evaluation of university inventions: Judging a book by its cover?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 4998-5001.
    9. Gideon D. Markman & Peter T. Gianiodis & Phillip H. Phan, 2009. "Supply‐Side Innovation and Technology Commercialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 625-649, June.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    13. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Samira Yusef Araújo Falani Bezerra & Ana Lúcia Vitale Torkomian, 2024. "Technology Transfer Offices: a Systematic Review of the Literature and Future Perspective," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 4455-4488, March.
    2. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2013. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 7, pages 129-144, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Rania HENTATI & Jean-Luc PRIGENT, 2010. "Structured Portfolio Analysis under SharpeOmega Ratio," EcoMod2010 259600073, EcoMod.
    4. Diecidue, E. & Schmidt, U. & Wakker, P.P., 2000. "A Theory of the Gambling Effect," Discussion Paper 2000-75, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    5. Thomas Kourouxous & Thomas Bauer, 2019. "Violations of dominance in decision-making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 209-239, April.
    6. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    7. Oliver, Adam, 2003. "The internal consistency of the standard gamble: tests after adjusting for prospect theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 159, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Gijs Kuilen & Peter Wakker, 2006. "Learning in the Allais paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 155-164, December.
    9. Jou, Rong-Chang & Chen, Ke-Hong, 2013. "An application of cumulative prospect theory to freeway drivers’ route choice behaviours," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 123-131.
    10. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.
    11. Ding, David K. & Charoenwong, Charlie & Seetoh, Raymond, 2004. "Prospect theory, analyst forecasts, and stock returns," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(4-5), pages 425-442.
    12. Pessali, Huascar & Berger, Bruno, 2010. "A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano [Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect]," MPRA Paper 26104, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Shuping Wu & Zan Yang, 2023. "Government Behavior on Urban Land Supply: Does it Follow a Prospect Preference?," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 264-286, August.
    14. Schwanen, Tim & Ettema, Dick, 2009. "Coping with unreliable transportation when collecting children: Examining parents' behavior with cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 511-525, June.
    15. Jiakun Zheng & Ling Zhou, 2025. "Too risky to hedge: An experiment on narrow bracketing," Post-Print hal-05063379, HAL.
    16. Zan Yang & Shuping Wu, 2019. "Land acquisition outcome, developer risk attitude and land development timing," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 233-271, August.
    17. Stefan Schiller, 2017. "The Quest for Rationality: Chief Financial Officers’ and Accounting Master’s Students’ Perception of Economic Rationality," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, April.
    18. Matthew Rabin, 1998. "Psychology and Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 11-46, March.
    19. Birnbaum, Michael H., 2004. "Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: Effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 40-65, September.
    20. Jasna Auer Antoncic & Bostjan Antoncic & Matjaz Gantar & Robert D. Hisrich & Lawrence J. Marks & Alexandre A. Bachkirov & Zhaoyang Li & Pierre Polzin & Jose L. Borges & Antonio Coelho & Marja-Liisa Ka, 2018. "Risk-Taking Propensity and Entrepreneurship: The Role of Power Distance," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 26(01), pages 1-26, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:jknowl:v:16:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s13132-024-02171-w. 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.