Assessment framework for the evaluation and prioritization of university inventions for licensing and commercialization

EMJ - Engineering Management Journal

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 28-36

  Rahal, Ahmad D ^a   Rabelo, Luis C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Technology licensing; Technology management and commercialization; University technology office and transfer

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

COMMERCIALIZATION; TECHNOLOGY LICENSING; TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 33846858816     PISSN: 10429247     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10429247.2006.11431711     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Allen, Thomas J., Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technology Information Within the R&D Organization, MIT Press (1977).
2. Agarwal, Rajshree, and Michael Gort, “First-Mover Advantage and the Speed of Competitive Entry, 18871986,” The Journal of Law and Economics, 44 (2001), p. 161.
3. Association of University Technology Managers, Inc., AUTM Licensing Survey: Fiscal Year 2003, Association of University Technology Managers (2003).
4. Bercovitz, Janet, et al., “Organizational Structure as a Determinant of Academic Patent and Licensing Behavior: an Exploratory Study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State Universities,” Journal of Technology Transfer, 26:1-2 (2001), p. 21.
5. Berry, Dianne, C., and Donald E. Broadbent, “The Combination of Explicit and Implicit Learning Processes in Task Control,” Psychological Research, 49:1 (1987), p. 7.
6. Berry, Dianne C., and Donald E. Broadbent, “On the Relationship Between Task Performance and Associated Verbalizable Knowledge,” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36:2 (1984), p. 209.
7. Bills, Katrina, “A Guide to Licensing Biotechnology,” les Nouvelles, 39:2 (June, 2004), pp. 86-94.
8. Cooper, Robert G., and Elko J. Kleinschmidt, “Success Factors in Product Innovation,” Industrial Marketing Management, 16:3 (1987), p. 215.
9. Council on Governmental Relations (COGR): 1999, The Bayh- Dole Act: Guide to the Law and Implementing Regulations, Washington, DC: COGR.
10. Crane, Diana, “Scientists at Major and Minor Universities: a Study of Productivity and Recognition,” American Sociological Review, 30:5 (1965), p. 699.
11. Degnan, Stephen Alan D.B.A., The Use of Conjoint Analysis to Establish the Most Important Evaluation Factors in Technology Transfer and Patent Licensing Negotiations, D.B.A., Golden Gate University (2002).
12. Elfenbein, Daniel Walter, Empirical Studies of Technology and Alliance Contracts, Ph.D., Harvard University (2004).
13. Galbraith, Craig S., “Transferring Core Manufacturing Technologies in High-Technology Firms,” California Management Review, 32:4 (Summer, 1990), p. 56.
14. Hall, Bronwyn H., Adam Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg, “Market Value and Patent Citations,” The Rand Journal of Economics, 36:1 (2005), p. 16.
15. Hall, Bronwyn H., Albert N. Link, and John T. Scott, “Barriers Inhibiting Industry from Partnering with Universities: Evidence from the Advanced Technology Program,” Journal of Technology Transfer, 26:1-2 (2001), p. 87.
16. Hall, Bronwyn H., and Rosemarie Ham Ziedonis, “The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995,” The Rand Journal of Economics, 32:1 (2001), p. 101.
17. Hauksson, Arni G., The Commercialization of University Research Discoveries: Are University Technology Transfer Offices Stimulating the Process? PhD, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1998.
18. Henderson, Rebecca, Adam B. Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg, “Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment Comment,” The American Economic Review, 95:1 (March, 2005), p. 461.
19. Henderson, Rebecca, Adam B. Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg, “Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 1965-1988,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80:1 (1998), p. 119.
20. Heslop, Louise A., Eileen McGregor, and May Griffith, “Development of a Technology Readiness Assessment Measure: The Cloverleaf Model of Technology Transfer,” Journal of Technology Transfer, 26:4 (2001), p. 369.
21. Hosmer, David W., Scott Taber, and Stanley Lemeshow, “The Importance of Assessing the Fit of Logistic Regression Models: A Case Study,” American Journal of Public Health, 81:12 (1991), p. 1630.
22. Jaffe, Adam B., Manuel Trajtenberg, and Michael S. Forgarty, “Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors,” The American Economic Review, 90:2 (2000), p. 215.
23. Menard, Scott W., Applied Logistic Regression Analysis, a Sage University Paper, Ed. Michael S. Lewis-Beck, No. 106, Sage Publications (1995).
24. Meseri, Ofer, and Shlomo Maital,“A Survey Analysis of University- Technology Transfer in Israel: Evaluation of Projects and Determinants of Success,” Journal of Technology Transfer, 26:1-2 (Jan., 2001), p. 115.
25. Mitchell, Will and Kulwant Singh, “Survival of Businesses Using Collaborative Relationships to Commercialize Complex Goods,” Strategic Management Journal, 17:3 (1996), p. 169.
26. Mowery, David C., Richard R. Nelson, and Ziedonis, Bhaven N Sampat’ Arvids A., “The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980,” Research Policy, 30:1 (2001), p. 99.
27. Mowery, David C., and Bhaven N. Sampat, “The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University-Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?” Journal of Technology Transfer, 30:1-2 (2005), p. 115.
28. Mowery, David C., and Bhaven N. Sampat, “Patenting and Licensing University Inventions: Lessons from the History of the Research Corporation,” Industrial and Corporate Change, 10:2 (2001), p. 317.
29. Mowery, David C., and Bhaven N. Sampat, University Patents and Patent Policy Debates in the USA, 1925-1980,” Industrial and Corporate Change, 10:3 (2001), p. 781.
30. Muir, Albert E., The Technology Transfer System: Inventions: Marketing, Licensing, Patenting, Setting, Practice, Management, Policy, Latham Book Pub. (1997).
31. Nerkar, Atul, and Scott Shane, “Determinants of Technology Commercialization: An Empirical
32. Examination of Academically Sourced Inventions, “University of Maryland”: Smith Research Network (2001), http://bmgt3notes.umd.edu/Faculty/KM/papers.nsf/6de61a84f4107c9d852567f2006c7c0e/73330a9b625614ff85256dl6006551df?OpenDocument.
33. Nerkar, Atul, and Scott Shane, “When Do Start-Ups that Exploit Patented Academic Knowledge Survive?” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21:9 (2003), p. 1391.
34. Perrow C., “Organizational Prestige: Some Functions and Dysfunctions,” American Journal of Sociology, 66:4 (1961), p. 335.
35. Podolny, Joel M., “A Status-Based Model of Market Competition,” The American Journal of Sociology, 98:4 (1993), p. 829.
36. Powers, Joshua B., “Commercializing Academic Research: Resource Effects on Performance of University Technology Transfer” Journal of Higher Education, 74:1 (Jan./Feb., 2003), p. 26.
37. Poyago-Theotoky, Joanna, John Beath, and Donald S. Siegel, “Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University-Industry Partnerships,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18:1 (2002), p. 10.
38. Rogers, E.M., Jong Yin, and Joern Hoffman, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Technology Transfer Offices at U.S. Research Universities,” The Journal of the Association of University Technology Manager, 12 (2000), p. 60.
39. Rogers, E. M., Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed., The Free Press (1995).
40. Roth, A. (Ed.), Reputations in Games and Markets, Game Theoretic Models of Bargaining, Cambridge University Press (1985).
41. Sampat, Bhaven N., David C. Mowery, and Arvids A. Ziedonis, “Changes in University Patent Quality After the Bayh-Dole Act: A Re-Examination,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21:9 (2003), p. 1371.
42. Shane, Scott A., and Karl T. Ulrich, “Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science,” Management Science, 50:2 (2004), p. 133.
43. Shenkar, Oded, and Ephraim Yuchtman-Yaar, “Reputation, Image, Prestige, and Goodwill: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Organizational Standing,” Human Relations, 50:11 (1997), p. 1361.
44. Sine, Wesley David, Scott Shane, and Dante Di Gregorio, “The Halo Effect and Technology Licensing: The Influence of Institutional Prestige on the Licensing of University Inventions,” Management Science, 49:4 (2003), p. 478.
45. Tabachnick, B.G., and L.S. Fidell, Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed., Allyn and Bacon (2000).
46. Thursby, Jerry G., and Marie C. Thursby, “Industry Perspectives on Licensing University Technologies: Sources and Problems,” AUTM XI.I [2000 AUTM Journal Volume XII (2000)].
47. Thursby, Jerry G., and Marie C. Thursby, “Industry/University Licensing: Characteristics, Concerns and Issues from the Perspective of the Buyer,” Journal of Technology Transfer, 28:3-4 (2003), p. 207.
48. Thursby, Jerry G., and Marie C. Thursby, “Who is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing,” Management Science, 48:1 (2002), p. 90.
49. Trajtenberg, Manuel, and Rebecca Henderson, “University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window on the Basicness of,” Economics of Innovation & New Technology, 5:1 (May, 1997), p. 19.
50. Trajtenberg, Manuel, “A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovation,” The Rand Journal of Economics, 21:1 (Spring, 1990), p. 172.
51. Vornatas, Nicholas, and Jun Kim Young, “Determinants of Technology Licensing,” The George Washington Center for the Study of Globalization (GWCSG) (April 9, 2004).