U.S. federal laboratories face challenges to partnerships that result in commercial technologies.

Collaborative research partnerships between universities and Department of Defense (DOD) laboratories are important to national and homeland security missions. From the point of view of the laboratories, university collaborations help them to deliver world-class research while providing the opportunity to develop and grow a talent pipeline. Benefits to universities range from the opportunity to work on cutting-edge problems of national importance to gaining access to specialized research facilities and potential channels for funding. This report examines the current landscape of DOD laboratory-university research partnerships and recommends steps to reduce barriers faced in these undertakings and to increase the number of collaborations between the two entities. The work was informed by structured discussions with members of the research community and research leaders at universities and DOD laboratories. The overarching insights gained from these individuals experience with such collaborative partnerships are: • DOD laboratories seek partnerships that support their missions. The scope and extent of the DOD laboratories' technical collaboration with universities is governed by their mission-based operational needs. Thus, research partnerships are primarily initiated when DOD laboratories see an unmet need and reach out to external experts. A corollary to this is that universities should view the DOD as a customer whose partnerships will be focused in DOD areas of need. Within this context, the onus is on the university to understand the laboratory's research needs, propose ideas for collaboration, and seek ways to improve their visibility to the laboratories. • Currently available mechanisms for long-term partnerships are adequate for DOD needs, but stronger short-term partnership mechanisms are needed. From the perspective of DOD research leadership interviewed for this task, the research partnership agreements that DOD laboratories currently have in place with universities (i.e., the larger and longer term collaborations such as Cooperative Research and Development Agreements, Collaborative Research Agreements/Cooperative Technical Agreements, and University Affiliated Research Centers) are adequate for their needs. This view did not extend to personnel exchanges, educational partnerships, and other short-term agreements, which the DOD research leadership strongly endorsed, and would like to see strengthened. If the goal is to increase the number of long-term and large-scale research partnership agreements between the two communities, DOD's vi Appendix C.

Executive SummaryTechnology transfer is the process of sharing, transmitting, or conveying technology, data, and information (intellectual property) between government agencies, industry, and academia. The broad goal of this assessment was to identify exemplar practices for technology transfer recommended by Department of Defense (DoD) laboratory staff, DoD Offices of Research and Technology Applications (ORTAs), DoD legal staff, and other stakeholders. The purpose is to inform all personnel at DoD laboratories and technology transfer offices about these practices and encourage their adoption across the DoD. Literature ReviewA review of academic literature, government reports, and legal documents on technology transfer highlighted strategies and factors for success, but not specific practices. The exemplar practices presented in the literature focus on high-level strategies to improve technology transfer at DoD laboratories. These strategies include providing guidance to DoD laboratories to strategically plan and engage in technology transfer; to empower and reward researchers to engage in technology transfer; to create effective and efficient technology transfer offices; to establish processes that streamline executing technology transfer agreements; and to leverage other technology transfer resources at the local, State, and national levels.The literature identified the following critical factors for a successful technology transfer program: an effective ORTA, engaged researchers, well-managed intellectual property, effective use of technology transfer mechanisms, efficient technology transfer processes, and meaningful interaction with industry through marketing or partnerships.The literature also highlighted challenges for implementing and encouraging technology transfer at DoD laboratories. For example, the DoD is more focused on technology transition than technology transfer. The goal of technology transition is to spin DoD-developed technologies back into the DoD as products and processes. In addition, many DoD technologies may not be relevant to commercialization in the private sector or may be classified or sensitive. The private sector is concerned with cost and performance, while the DoD often weights performance as more important, especially when it comes to weapon systems. iv MethodologyInterviews with DoD laboratory ORTA staff and other stakeholders were the primary data-collection method used for this assessment. Using the themes identified in the literature, the research team developed a guide for gathering information on practices and policy recommendations based on semi-structured interviews with technology transfer practitioners, experts, and stakeholders. These interviews were held between June and September 2012.Programs and processes identified during the discussions were considered exemplar practices for technology transfer at DoD laboratories if they resulted in measurable outputs or outcomes (e.g., reduction in the number of days to execute agreements or increase in the number of agreemen...

Geoffrey e. ravilious is a regulatory affairs manager within the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP). He has held several technology transfer-focused positions in federal agencies, including the US Navy's Medical R&D Technology Transfer Office and the NCI Technology Transfer Center (TTC). In these roles, he focused on improving intramural support functions in order to accelerate the development of nascent technology into commercial products. He holds a BS in chemistry from the University of North Carolina and a PhD in biophysics from Washington University in St. Louis.

No abstract