Efficiency and evaluation analysis of a network of technology transfer brokers

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 7-24

  Roxas, Salvatore Amico ^a,b   Pirolic, Giuseppe ^a   Sorrentinod, Mario ^c  

^a JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^b ENEA   (Italy)

^c SECOND UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES   (Italy)

Author keywords

Brokers; Data envelopment analysis (dea); Efficiency; Innovation intermediaries; Ordered probit; Technology transfer

Indexed keywords

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE; INNOVATION; MANAGEMENT; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

EID: 78751628915     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: 14653990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2011.537085     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aigner, D., C.A.K. Lovell, and P. Schmidt. 1977. Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. Journal of Econometrics 6, no. 1: 21-37.
2. Albors, J., E. Sweeney, and A. Hidalgo. 2005. Transnational technology transfer networks for SMEs. A review of the state-of-the art and an analysis of the European IRC network. Production Planning & Control 16, no. 4: 413-23.
3. Anderson, T.R., T.U. Daim, and F.F. Lavoie. 2007. Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation 27: 306-18.
4. Arora, A., A. Fosfuri, and A. Gambardella. 2001. Markets for technology: The economics of innovation and corporate strategy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Autio, E., and T. Laamanen. 1995. Measurement and evaluation of technology transfer: Review of technology transfer mechanisms and indicators. International Journal of Technology Management 10, nos. 7/8: 643-56.
6. Aw, B.J., M.J. Roberts, and T. Winston. 2007. Export market participation, investments in R&D and worker training, and the evolution of firm productivity. The World Economy 30, no. 1: 83-104
7. Bessant, J. 1995. Networking as a mechanism for enabling organisational innovations. In Europe's next step: Organisational innovation, competition and employment, eds. L.E. Andreasen, B. Coriat, F. den Hertog and R. Kaplinsky, 253-70. Ilford: Cass.
8. Bessant, J. 1999. The rise and fall of 'Supernet': A case study of technology transfer policy for smaller firms. Research Policy 28: 601-14.
9. Bessant, J., and H. Rush. 1995. Building bridges for innovation: The role of consultants in technology transfer. Research Policy 24: 97-114.
10. Bidault, F., and W.A. Fischer. 1994.Technology transactions: Network over markets.R&DManagement 24, no. 4: 373-86.
11. Blumenstyk, G. 2005. Colleges cash in on commercial activity. Chronicle of Higher Education, pp.A25-A26. 2 December 2005.
12. Bolisani, E., and E. Scarso. 2004. Knowledge-intensive transfer of innovation: E-commerce and small business. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations 2, no. 4: 335-452.
13. Bozeman, B. 1997. The cooperative technology paradigm: An assessment. In Technology transfer and public policy, ed. Y.S. Lee, 172-88.Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
14. Bozeman, B. 2000. Technology transfer and public policy:A review of research and theory. Research Policy 29: 627-55.
15. Bryant, T., and R. Reenstra-Bryant. 1998. Technology brokers in the North American software industry: Getting the most out of mismatched dyads. International Journal of Technology Management 16: 281-90.
16. Buratti, N., and L. Penco. 2001. Assisted technology transfer to SMEs: Lessons from an exemplary case. Technovation 21: 35-43.
17. R.S. 1995. Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Caputo, A.C., F. Cucchiella, L. Fratocchi, P.M. Pelagagge, and F. Scacchia. 2002. A methodological framework for innovation transfer to SMEs. Industrial Management & Data Systems 102, no. 5: 271-83.
19. Carlsson, B., and A. Fridh. 2002. Technology transfer in United States universities. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12: 199-232.
20. Carlsson, B., and R. Stankiewicz. 1991. On the nature, function, and composition of technological systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 1, no. 2: 93-118.
21. Carrara, J.L., and M. Duhamel. 1995. Technology brokers in Europe. European Commission, Brussels, EIMS, No.10.
22. Chapple,W., A. Lockett, D. Siegel, and M. Wright. 2005. Assessing the relative performance of U.K. university technology transfer offices: Parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy 34: 369-84.
23. Chesbrough, H. 2006. Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
24. Christensen, C.M. 1997. The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
25. Clarke, B.R. 1998. Creating entrepreneurial universities; organizational pathways of transformation. New York: IAU Press.
26. Cohen, W., and D. Levinthal. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 128-52.
27. Cordero-Ferrara, J.M., F. Pedraja-Chaparroa, and J. Salinas-Jimenez. 2008. Measuring efficiency in education:An analysis of different approaches for incorporating non-discretionary inputs. Applied Economics 40: 1323-39.
28. Debackere, K., and R. Veugelers. 2005. The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy 34, no. 3: 321-42.
29. Etzkowitz, H., A. Webster, C. Gebhart, and B.R.C. Terra. 2000. The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy 29, no. 2: 313-30.
30. Freeman, L.C. 1978. Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1: 205-39.
31. Fried, H.O., C.A.K. Lovell, and S.S. Schmidt. 2008. The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Hargadon, A.B. 2002. Brokering knowledge; linking learning and innovation. Research in Organizational Behavior 24: 41-85.
33. Hargadon, A.B., and R.I. Sutton. 1997.Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 716-49.
34. Hassink, R. 1996. Technology transfer agencies and regional economic development. European Planning Studies 4, no.2: 167-84.
35. Hoffman, K., M. Parejo, J. Bessant, and L. Perren. 1997. Innovation amongst small and medium-sized enterprises. Technovation 18: 39-55.
36. Hollanders, H. 2006. European regional innovation scoreboard; European trend chart on innovation. EuropeanTrend Chart on Innovation.Available at: http://www.proinno-europe.eu/page/doc/eis_2006_regional_innovation_scoreboard.pdf
37. Howells, J. 2006. Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy 35: 715-28.
38. Innovation Relay Centre Network. 2003. IRC Operation Manual. ver. 4. Luxembough: IRC-IRE Central Unit.
39. Jones-Evans, D., and M. Klofsten. 1999. Creating a bridge between university and industry in small European Countries: The role of the industrial liaison office. R & D Management 29, no. 1: 47-56.
40. Lichtenthaler, U., and H. Ernst. 2008. Intermediary services in the markets for technology: Organizational antecedents and performance consequences. Organizational Studies 29, no. 7: 1003-38.
41. Long, J.S. 1997. Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
42. Lundvall, B.-Å., B. Johnson, E.S. Andersen, and B. Dalum. 2002. National systems of production, innovation and competence-building. Research Policy 31: 213-31.
43. Meeusen, W., and J. van den Broeck. 1977. Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production functions with composed error. International Economic Review 18: 435-44.
44. Morgan, E., and N. Crawford. 1996. Technology broking activities in Europe - a survey. International Journal of Technology Management 12, no. 3: 360-7.
45. Powell, W.W., K.W. Koput, and L. Smith-Doerr. 1996. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 116-45.
46. Rogers, E.M. 1995. Diffusion of innovation. NewYork: Free Press.
47. Rothaermel, F.T., S.D. Agung, and L. Jiang. 2007. University entrepreneurship. A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change 16, no. 4: 691-791.
48. Sapsed, J., A. Grantham, and R. DeFillippi. 2007.Abridge over troubledwaters: Bridging organisations and entrepreneurial opportunities in emerging sectors. Research Policy 36: 1314-34.
49. Siegel, D., D. Waldman, and A. Link. 2003. Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy 32: 27-48.
50. Siegel, D.S., ed. 2006. Technology entrepreneurship: Institutions and agents involved in university technology transfer, vol. 1. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar.
51. Siegel, D.S., and P.H. Phan. 2005. Analyzing the effectiveness of university technology transfer: Implications for entrepreneurship education. In Advances in the study of entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic growth, ed. G. Liebcap, 1-38. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.
52. Thursby, J.G., and S. Kemp. 2002. Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy 31, no. 1: 109-24.
53. Thursby, J.G., and M.C. Thursby. 2002. Who is selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science 48, no. 1: 90-104.
54. Tödtling, F., and A. Kaufmann. 2001. The role of the region for innovation activities of SMEs. European Urban and Regional Studies 8, no. 3: 203-15.
55. Tödtling, F., and M. Trippl. 2005. One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy 34: 1203-19.
56. Winch, G., and R. Courtney. 2007. The organization of innovation brokers: An international review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 19, no. 6: 747-63.