Micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities to facilitate university technology transfer

Ma, Zhongxuan; Augustijn, Kevin D.; Esch, Iwan J. P. de; Bossink, Bart

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0283777

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis of the changes in the projects' commercialization and technology transfers in both organizations under study aligns with the dynamic approach to developing technology-based relationships between industry and SME support actors [29,30]. This research also brings new knowledge to consider the scope of activities and industry-specific operating models of technology transfer centers [31][32][33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Technology Transfer Centers as Support Instruments for SMEs—Comparative Analysis of Poland and Malaysia

Woźniak,

Matejun,

Azmi

et al. 2023

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of the paper is to compare technology transfer centers in Poland and Malaysia. Therefore, the authors decided to use the comparative analysis method. The findings show that technology transfer and commercialization efforts both in Poland and Malaysia are on the right track. This demonstrates the universities’ persistent dedication to turning research and innovative ideas into concrete products, as seen by the university’s sustained growth in total product commercialization. It emphasizes the critical role that they play in promoting technological transfers, particularly for SMEs. The paper contributes to the macroeconomics theory in the area of public policy. Furthermore, it also provides insights into the theory of incentives, particularly in the field of non-financial support. The findings could be of interest to policymakers on macro and micro levels.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Technology Transfer Centers as Support Instruments for SMEs—Comparative Analysis of Poland and Malaysia

Woźniak,

Matejun,

Azmi

et al. 2023

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the multiuniversity partnership enables research institutions to access a wide range of drug discovery resources and accelerates academic drug discovery cost-effectively and efficiently (Gurvich & Byrn, 2013). Another example can be university-industry contract research, which is important in achieving academic translational research as it combines the knowledge and expertise of universities and companies based on transitional R&D projects (Ma et al, 2023).…”

Section: Research Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing University-Industry Collaborative Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The significance of university-industry collaboration becomes even more pronounced within the pharmaceutical R&D context. Such collaborations provide a platform to address potential challenges by offering access to cutting-edge research, specialized facilities, and expertise. Collaborative models, such as multi-university partnerships and university-industry contract research, have emerged as viable methods to support innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Such collaborations have facilitated universities in accessing invaluable resources from their industrial counterparts, while industries have benefited from enhanced technological capabilities and foundational scientific knowledge. This symbiotic relationship not only benefits the primary stakeholders but also has broader societal implications, as it accelerates the transfer of scientific results to the market. This research adopts a broad definition of pharmaceutical university-industry R&D collaboration. The primary objective is to gain insights to answer the overarching question: How to manage innovation in pharmaceutical university-industry R&D practices? To answer this, the present research employs both quantitative (Chapters 2 and 3) and qualitative (Chapters 4 and 5) methodologies, with a multi-level analysis encompassing landscape- (Chapter 2), collaboration- (Chapter 3), university- (Chapter 4), and company (Chapter 5) perspectives. Based on the landscape perspective, Chapter 2 uses a bibliometric approach to analyze historical and emerging topics in the pharmaceutical UIC R&D context. The study identifies a rise in related publications, emphasizing the research’s importance. The comprehensive review categorizes publications into three levels that are industrial and organizational innovation strategy, -structure, and -culture. The chapter advocates for broader engagement by academic and commercial entities, emphasizing the potential of R&D alliances in the pharmaceutical industry, where university-industry collaborations are particularly promising. Chapter 3, using Neglected Tropical Diseases as the focal point, delves into whether the type of PPPs influences the initiation and duration of NTD-related clinical trials. The research identifies various collaborative types, among which NGO- and public sector-led collaborations are the major subtypes. Key determinants shaping these collaborations encompass scientific, logistical, political, and financial aspects. The chapter emphasizes the pivotal role companies play in combating NTDs, either independently or within public-private partnerships. The identified characteristics and determinants provide suggestions for practitioners to further optimize R&D strategies. Chapter 4 delves into the micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities within the university technology transfer process, drawing from empirical cases of the Industry Alliance Office and the Demonstrator Lab. For sensing capabilities, this chapter underscores the importance of timely identification of opportunities through internal competencies and external partnerships. On the seizing front, the research highlights the critical role of universities in aligning with industrial entities to maximize detected opportunities, emphasizing resource co-allocation and collaborative business models. Reconfiguring capabilities are important for universities to position themselves as central orchestrators within the broader of university-industry ecosystem. It is also important for partnering companies and academic entrepreneurs to employ dynamic capabilities with the aim of academic entrepreneurship. Chapter 5 delves into the micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities essential for academic entrepreneurship within the university-industry ecosystem. It emphasizes that sensing capabilities empower them to strategically allocate resources and address potential challenges. The chapter also underscores the significance of seizing capabilities in facilitating knowledge integration and partnership management. To ensure sustained innovation, it is important for high-tech enterprises to develop reconfiguring capabilities. To further research pharmaceutical UIC R&D innovation management, Chapter 6 then puts forward various recommendations to different stakeholders including universities, research institutes, startup companies, and regulatory agencies. Chapter 6 also adds some of the limitations of Chapters 2-5, based on which the present research hopes to provide some suggestions for future research.

show abstract

The Impact of Regional Patent Policies on University Technology Transfer: Empirical Evidence from China

2024

J Knowl Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities to facilitate university technology transfer

Cited by 6 publications

References 74 publications

Technology Transfer Centers as Support Instruments for SMEs—Comparative Analysis of Poland and Malaysia

Technology Transfer Centers as Support Instruments for SMEs—Comparative Analysis of Poland and Malaysia

Managing University-Industry Collaborative Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry

The Impact of Regional Patent Policies on University Technology Transfer: Empirical Evidence from China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About