Facilitating public-to-private technology transfer through consortia: initial evidence from Korea

Korean public research institutes (PRIs) are experimenting with a consortia approach for promoting public-to-private technology transfer. This research examines the effectiveness of five regional technology transfer consortia operating in Korea from 2002 to 2006 and explores their characteristics including motivations, facilitators, barriers, and challenges. The paper reports both quantitative and qualitative evidence. Archival and survey data were collected on the effectiveness and characteristics of the technology transfer consortia. The proposition was supported that membership in these consortia can enhance the technology transfer performance of participating PRIs. Reasons on how consortia increase PRI performance are discussed and four key drivers are seen as being critical to increasing the effectiveness of consortia. Conclusions focus on lessons learned for policy makers, PRIs, and consortia.

[1]  Brendan Galbraith,et al.  Defining and improving technology transfer business and management processes in university innovation centres , 2005 .

[2]  R. Wolson.  The role of technology transfer offices in building the South African biotechnology sector: an assessment of policies, practices and impact , 2007 .

[3]  Bo Carlsson,et al.  Technology transfer in United States universities , 2002 .

[4]  R. Carr.  Doing Technology Transfer in Federal Laboratories , 1994 .

[5]  R. Kneller,et al.  Technology transfer: a review for biomedical researchers. , 2001, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[6]  David B. Balkin,et al.  Entrepreneurship from the Ivory Tower: Do Incentive Systems Matter? , 2004 .

[7]  Sukanya Kemp,et al.  Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing , 2002 .

[8]  Harold Metcalf.  Lessons from history: Origins of the federal laboratory consortium for technology transfer , 1994 .

[9]  Tae Kyung Sung,et al.  Knowledge and technology transfer grid: empirical assessment , 2005, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[10]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  The Geographic Sources of Innovation: Technological Infrastructure and Product Innovation in the United States , 1994 .

[11]  Antoine Llor,et al.  Delay from patent filing to technology transfer: A statistical study at a major public research organization , 2007 .

[12]  David Zilberman,et al.  UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS: IMPACTS ON LOCAL AND U.S. ECONOMIES , 1993 .

[13]  Joseph Friedman,et al.  University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter? , 2003 .

[14]  Everett M. Rogers,et al.  Lessons learned about technology transfer , 2001 .

[15]  Robert K. Carr,et al.  Doing technology transfer in federal laboratories (Part 1) , 1992 .

[16]  Kenzo Fujisue,et al.  Promotion of academia-industry cooperation in Japan — establishing the “law of promoting technology transfer from university to industry” in Japan , 1998 .

[17]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Reinventing Public R&D: Patent Policy and the Commercialization of National Laboratory Technologies , 2001 .

[18]  Bo Carlsson,et al.  special issue: Technology transfer in United States universities , 2002 .

[19]  Lita Nelsen.  The Rise of Intellectual Property Protection in The American University , 1998, Science.

[20]  David V. Gibson,et al.  R & D collaboration on trial , 1994 .

[21]  Bradford L. Barham,et al.  UNIVERSITIES AND AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY PATENT PRODUCTION , 2000 .

[22]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities , 2001 .