Performance metrics for a technology commercialization program

International Journal of Technology Management

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 229-244

  Brown, Marilyn A ^a,b,c,d  

^a OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^c OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Performance metrics; Program evaluation; Technology policy

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; ENERGY RESOURCES; MARKETING; PUBLIC POLICY;

ENERGY RELATED INVENTIONS PROGRAM (ERIP); TECHNOLOGY COMMERCIALIZATION;

TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 0030649923     PISSN: 02675730     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/IJTM.1997.001661     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Tassey, G. (1995) Technology and Economic Growth: Implications for Federal Policy, Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce, NIST Planning Report pp.95-3.
2. US Department of Energy, Office of Science Policy (1995a) Corporate R&D in Transition: Changing Patterns of Private Sector Investment in Research and Development, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
3. The Futures Group (1984) Characterization of Innovations Introduced on the US Market in 1982, Washington, DC: US Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, March NTIS #PB84 212067.
4. Birley, S. (1987) 'New ventures and employment growth', Journal of Business Venturing 2(2): pp.155-65.
5. Kirchhoff, B.A. and Phillips, B.D. (1988) 'The effect of firm formation and growth on job creation in the United States', Journal of Business Venturing, 3, pp.261-272.
6. Office of Technology Assessment (1995) Innovation and Commercialization of Emerging Technology, OTA-BP-ITC-165, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
7. Rorke, M.L. and Livesay, H.C. (1986) A Longitudinal Examination of the Energy-Related Inventions Program, Rockville, Maryland: Mohawk Research Corporation.
8. Brown, M.A., Livesay, H.C., Lux, D.S. and Wilson, C.R. (1993) 'Demonstrations: the missing link in government-sponsored energy technology dDeployment', Technology in Society, 15(2) pp.185-205.
9. Livesay, H.C., Lux, D.S. and Brown, M.A. (1996) 'Human factors and the innovation process', Technovation, 16(4), pp.173-186.
10. Brown, M.A. et al. (1994) The Economic, Energy, and Environmental Impacts of the Energy-Related Inventions Program, Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL/CON-381 July.
11. Campbell, D.T. and Stanley, J.C. (1971) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, Chicago, Rand McNally and Co.
12. Brown, M.A., Curlee, C.R. and Elliott, S.R. (1995) 'Evaluating technology innovation programs: the use of comparison groups to identify impacts', Research Policy, 24, pp.669-84.
13. Roessner, J.D. (1989) 'Evaluating government inovation programs: lessons from the US experience', Research Policy, 18: pp.343-359.
14. Booz-Allen & Hamilton (1982) Management for the 1980s, New York.
15. Cooper, R.G. (1983) 'Most new products do succeed', Research Management, 26(6), pp.20-25, November-December.
16. Crawford, C.M. (1987) 'New product failure rates: a reprise', Research Management, 30(4), pp.20-24, July-August.
17. Florida, R. and Smith, D.F. (1993) 'Keep the government out of venture capital', Issues in Science and Technology, 9(4), pp.61-68.
18. Chemistry and Engineering News (1991) 8 July.
19. Dombrowski, L.P., Pine, G.D. and Rinholm, R.C. (1991) 'Benefits of GRI R&D products placed in commercial use through early 1991', Chicago, Illinois. Gas Research Institute, Gas Research Insights, May.
20. Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use (1995) Annual Energy Review 1994, DOE/EIA-0384(94), Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
21. US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1995) Innovation and Commercialization of Emerging Technology, OTA-BP-ITC-165, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, September.
22. US Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (1995b) Energy for Today and Tomorrow, Investments for a Strong America, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
23. Brown, M.A. and Wilson, C.R. (1993) 'R&D spinoffs: serendipity vs. a managed process', Journal of Technology Transfer, 18 (3-4), pp.5-15.
24. Buisseret, T.J., Cameron, H.M. and Georghiou, L. (1995) 'What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms', Int. J. Technology Management, Special Issue on the Evaluation of Research and Innovation, 10 (4/5/6), pp.587-600.
25. Chrisman, J.J., Hoy, F. and Robinson, R.B. (1987) 'New venture development: the costs and benefits of public sector assistance', Journal of Business Venturing, 2: pp.315-328.
26. Geller, H. and McGaraghan, S. (1996) 'Successful government-industry partnerships: the US Department of Energy's role in advancing energy-efficient technologies', Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, February.
27. US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1995) Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1995, 115th Edition, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.