BTP—Best Transfer Practices. A tool for qualitative analysis of tech-transfer offices: A cross cultural analysis

Abstract The objective of this article is to present a qualitative analysis tool which technology transfer offices (TTOs) can utilize to improve their efficiency and effectiveness. Such qualitative tool is one of the novelties presented. The other is information that advances understanding of the processes, procedures and structures required to transfer technology, as a set of best practices. From December 2008 to September 2010 a variety of methodologies (document analysis, participative observation, interviews and surveys) generated data which led to development of a theoretical framework. The theoretical framework, called Master Plan for Technology Transfer (TT), is a reference schema for best practices. The Master Plan contains 271 rules (good practices) referring to 43 facilitators distributed in seven groups. The facilitators and rules were selected from a coding process based on grounded theory, where facilitators are the categories and rules are their properties. Based on the methodologies and development of the Master Plan, we constructed a tool called Best Transfer Practices (BTP) which is a qualitative tool to assess and study TTOs and their host R&D institutions. The collection of rules and facilitators are the soul of our BTP. It is our contribution to the knowledge of actual practices in TT.

[1]  Mike Wright,et al.  Assessing the relative performance of U.K. university technology transfer offices: parametric and non-parametric evidence , 2005 .

[2]  Fred Pries,et al.  ‘Repeat commercializers,’ the ‘habitual entrepreneurs’ of university–industry technology transfer , 2009 .

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

[4]  H. Etzkowitz,et al.  The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm , 2000 .

[5]  David V. Gibson,et al.  A set of Facilitators that drive the Technology Transfer Offices (TTO) in the actual effective and efficient practices of TT , 2010 .

[6]  T. Daim,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer , 2007 .

[7]  Christoph Grimpe,et al.  Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany , 2010 .

[8]  Paul D. Guild,et al.  Commercializing inventions resulting from university research: Analyzing the impact of technology characteristics on subsequent business models , 2011 .

[9]  Rudi Bekkers,et al.  Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development based industries: transfer mechanisms and barriers , 2011 .

[10]  Kristel Miller,et al.  The development of University Technology Transfer stakeholder relationships at a regional level: Lessons for the future , 2012 .

[11]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  The Role of Academic Technology Transfer Organizations in Improving Industry Science Links , 2005 .

[12]  David Bennett,et al.  University to business technology transfer—UK and USA comparisons , 2007 .

[13]  Larry M. Dooley,et al.  The entrepreneurial university: Examining the underlying academic tensions , 2011 .

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

[15]  Rod B. McNaughton,et al.  ENTRE-U: An entrepreneurial orientation scale for universities , 2011 .

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

[17]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1992 .

[18]  A. Sánchez,et al.  University-industry relationships in peripheral regions: The case of Aragon in Spain , 1995 .

[19]  Alice Lam,et al.  What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’? , 2011 .

[20]  Corine Genet,et al.  Which Model of Technology Transfer for Nanotechnology? A Comparison with Biotech and Microelectronics , 2012 .

[21]  Nicholas Theodorakopoulos,et al.  Transferring technology from university to rural industry within a developing economy context: The case for nurturing communities of practice , 2012 .

[22]  David Nunes Resende.  Transferência de tecnologia: as práticas actuais e uma metodologia para análise subjectiva das instituições , 2010 .

[23]  Yuri Novozhilov.  University–industry cooperation in Eastern Europe: the experience of some advanced universities in the USSR , 2014 .

[24]  Dipti Pandya,et al.  How scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship , 2008 .

[25]  J. Oosterhaven,et al.  Annual Report 2008 , 2009 .

[26]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[27]  George Kozmetsky,et al.  R&D Collaboration on Trial: The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation , 1994 .

[28]  W. Powell,et al.  To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer , 2001 .