IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rpi/rpiwpe/0423.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the Relative Performance of U.K. University Technology Transfer Offices: Parametric and Non-Parametric Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Wendy Chapple

    () (Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK.)

  • Andy Lockett

    () (Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK.)

  • Donald S. Siegel

    () (Department of Economics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY 12180-3590, USA)

  • Mike Wright

    () (Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK.)

Abstract

We present evidence on the relative efficiency of U.K. university technology transfer offices (TTOs) using data envelopment analysis (DEA) and stochastic frontier estimation (SFE). We find that U.K. TTOs exhibit low levels of absolute efficiency. Universities located in regions with higher levels of R&D and GDP appear to be more efficient in technology transfer, implying that there may be regional spillovers in technology transfer. Our results suggest that TTOs may need to be reconfigured into smaller units, since there may be scope for the development of regionally-based, sector focused TTOs. Consistent with qualitative evidence from U.S. TTOs (e.g., Siegel et al. (2003a, b, c)), we find that there may be a need to enhance the skills and capabilities of U.K. TTO managers and licensing professionals.

Suggested Citation

  • Wendy Chapple & Andy Lockett & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2004. "Assessing the Relative Performance of U.K. University Technology Transfer Offices: Parametric and Non-Parametric Evidence," Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics 0423, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:rpi:rpiwpe:0423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.economics.rpi.edu/workingpapers/rpi0423.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    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. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    3. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy & Van de Velde, Els & Vohora, Ajay, 2005. "Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 183-216, March.
    4. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    5. Albert Link & Donald Siegel, 2005. "Generating science-based growth: an econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university-industry technology transfer," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 169-181.
    6. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W, 2001. "To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 99-114, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Fare, Rolf & Knox Lovell, C. A., 1978. "Measuring the technical efficiency of production," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 150-162, October.
    9. Bania, Neil & Eberts, Randall W & Fogarty, Michael S, 1993. "Universities and the Startup of New Companies: Can We Generalize from Route 128 and Silicon Valley?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(4), pages 761-766, November.
    10. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 2007. "Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 31-64, January.
    11. CĂ©line Druilhe & Elizabeth Garnsey, 2004. "Do Academic Spin-Outs Differ and Does it Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 269-285, August.
    12. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2002. "Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 90-104, January.
    13. Kodde, David A & Palm, Franz C, 1986. "Wald Criteria for Jointly Testing Equality and Inequality Restriction s," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1243-1248, September.
    14. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    15. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rpi:rpiwpe:0423. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shawn Kantor). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/derpius.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.