Organizational structures of Knowledge Transfer Offices: an analysis of the world’s top-ranked universities

Brescia, F.; Colombo, Giorgio; Landoni, Paolo

doi:10.1007/s10961-014-9384-5

Cited by 90 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, most empirical research only focuses on the individual and environmental levels, whereas organisational structure is neglected at the organisational level. Although the way organisations are designed explains how people interact and how activities are carried out (Drucker, 1973), researchers who investigated organisational structures of UTTOs as a performance determinant address it as a "secondary subject" (Brescia et al, 2016). In fact, Schoen et al (2014) (Wernerfelt, 1984) to explore the organisational structure of UTTOs as a resource factor that might explain performance differences between universities in technology transfer.…”

Section: Aims Of This Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the UTTO context, knowledge and technology transfer activities are distributed either within a single central unit or among several units within universities (Brescia et al, 2016). Accordingly, if technology transfer activities are carried out at a single location, the UTTO is labelled as centralised.…”

Section: Centralisation/ Decentralisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Task-specialisation is directly related to UTTO activities, which can be classified into three themes; IP-related support, research-related support and spin-offs creation support (Brescia et al, 2016). UTTOs can be classified by the degree of specialisation they exercise in relation to tasks.…”

Section: Specialisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Autonomy as a configurational dimension is concerned with the locus of decision-making power (Brescia et al, 2016). In fact, the level of autonomy is included in the latest report for technology transfer by the European Commission (2009), which highlights its importance as a structural dimension.…”

Section: Configurational Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Brescia et al (2016), the support activities that UTTOs provide various stakeholders can be classified in three main areas; intellectual property and licensing, sponsored-research and consultancy and spin-off creation. Although not all UTTOs simultaneously engage in all three types of activities, the interrelatedness of these activities is emphasised (Mathieu, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

University technology transfer performance in Australia

Alhomayden¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

University technology transfer is considered to be an important driver of national innovation and regional economic development. However, previous studies on university technology transfer productivity and efficiency have not evaluated the relative efficiency of Australian universities in technology transfer. In the first study of this thesis, secondary data was used to conduct data envelopment analysis to measure the technical efficiency of Australian universities in producing four technology transfer related outputs, namely the number of invention disclosures, the number of licenses executed, the amount of licensing royalty income and the number of spin-offs created with university equity. Universities were then ranked according to the average technical efficiency scores for producing the four technology transfer related outputs. Subsequently, taking differences between universities in technology transfer efficiency into account; semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 University Technology Transfer Office (UTTO) representatives to identify 12 antecedents of university technology transfer efficiency.The literature on university technology transfer has proposed individual, organisational and environmental determinants to superior university technology transfer performance.However, most of the previous studies on university technology transfer productivity and efficiency have not made a theoretical contribution to the field which might have limited the generalisability of their findings. In the second study of this thesis, the Resource-Based Theory (RBT) was adopted to examine and explain performance differences between universities in technology transfer considering three resource factors, namely the number of ARC Linkage funded projects (financial capital), the number of UTTO staff holding a PhD (human capital) and the joining of a UTTO to a consortium (social capital). Using primary and secondary data, these resource factors were regressed against six university technology transfer performance measures, namely the number of invention disclosures, the number of filed patents, the number of executed licenses, the amount of licensing royalty income, the number of all spin-offs created and the number of spin-offs created with university equity.Empirical findings show that the application of financial, human and social capital matters for technology transfer performance. UTTOs that possess these tangible and intangible resources report higher performance on most of the performance measures applied.Previous studies have not established a relationship between the organisational structure of UTTOs and their performance. In the third study of this thesis, the RBT was adopted to 3 | P a g e examine and explain performance differences between universities in technology transfer considering four resource factors in relation to the organisational structure of UTTOs; centralisation, specialisation, configurational autonomy and financial dependence. Using primary and secondary data, these resource factors ...

show abstract

Section: Aims Of This Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Centralisation/ Decentralisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Specialisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Configurational Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations