Knowledge Determinant in University Commercialization: A Case Study of Malaysia Public University

Abstract Recent debate on university commercialization has drawn growing attention to the role university play as drivers to local economic growth. Studies related to knowledge determinant have assume that their presence would encourage greater commercialize activities. However, this is not always true. Past studies have also overlook the alignment of the type of knowledge required for successful commercialization with its audiences. We argued that knowledge did not directly influence entrepreneurial behaviour but rather the perception towards behaving entrepreneurially. Moreover, since the experience of academic researchers and entrepreneurs are different, the knowledge required for successful venture would be different. Thus, having the appropriate knowledge would then enhance innovators’ perceptions toward commercialization which manipulate their propensity to engage in this activity. This paper hopes to provide insight to the type of knowledge desired by interviewing the academic researchers and entrepreneurs in Malaysia universities as well as the impact of perceived feasibility on commercializing activities.

[1]  H. Etzkowitz Research groups as ???quasi-firms???: the invention of the entrepreneurial university , 2003 .

[2]  F. Rothaermel,et al.  University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature , 2007 .

[3]  Patenting trends & innovation in industrial biotechnology , 2008 .

[4]  E. Berman,et al.  Why did universities start patenting? Institution-building and the road to the Bayh-Dole Act. , 2008, Social studies of science.

[5]  M. Wright,et al.  Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications , 2007 .

[6]  I. Ajzen Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. , 2002 .

[7]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation methods , 1981 .

[8]  E. Hippel Horizontal Innovation Networks - By and For Users , 2007 .

[9]  Lida Holtzhausen,et al.  Employees' perceptions of company values and objectives and employer‐employee relationships , 2009 .

[10]  Mike Wright,et al.  Mid-range universities' linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries , 2008 .

[11]  James K. Galbraith,et al.  What is the American Model Really About?: Soft Budgets and the Keynesian Devolution , 2007 .

[12]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[13]  D. A. Bell Academics or entrepreneurs , 1979 .

[14]  L. Mosley,et al.  The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century , 2005 .

[15]  Iwan von Wartburg,et al.  Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization , 2009 .

[16]  Ming-Lang Tseng,et al.  An assessment of cause and effect decision-making model for firm environmental knowledge management capacities in uncertainty , 2010, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[17]  Wei-Wen Wu,et al.  Knowledge Management Strategies in Linguistic Preferences , 2011 .

[18]  Alessandro Muscio,et al.  What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy , 2010 .

[19]  M. Lehrer,et al.  A national systems view of university entrepreneurialism: Inferences from comparison of the German and US experience , 2009 .

[20]  A. Mehta Advertising Attitudes and Advertising Effectiveness , 2000, Journal of Advertising Research.

[21]  James O. Fiet,et al.  A Prescriptive Analysis of Search and Discovery , 2007 .

[22]  Kevin Hindle,et al.  Commercialisation of New Knowledge within Universities: Exploring Performance Disparities , 2008 .

[23]  A. A. Arntzen,et al.  Working knowledge, the university‐industry linkage in Thailand: concepts and issues , 2008 .

[24]  Michael D. Reilly,et al.  Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions , 2000 .

[25]  R. Yin Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[26]  Hans Löfsten,et al.  Proximity as a Resource Base for Competitive Advantage: University–Industry Links for Technology Transfer , 2004 .

[27]  Charles R. Stoner,et al.  A mixed method approach to understanding brand personality , 2009 .

[28]  Paul M. Swamidass,et al.  Why university inventions rarely produce income? Bottlenecks in university technology transfer , 2009 .

[29]  M. Wright,et al.  Research and Technology Commercialization , 2008 .

[30]  Kay M. Harman,et al.  Governments and universities as the main drivers of enhanced Australian University research commercialisation capability , 2004 .