Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer from US government R&amp;D laboratories: the impact of market orientation

Bozeman, Barry; Coker, Karen

doi:10.1016/0166-4972(92)90045-j

Cited by 46 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Often, the technology transfer process is much more complex in the case of the so-called "dual-use" technologies, where a judgment about the threat a technology may pose to national security must be incorporated into the technology transfer decision process. Since the prevailing view is that it is better to err on the side of caution, often such dual-use technologies, while having appealing commercial applications, are restricted from utilization by bureaucratic methods that assume "it is better to be safe than sorry" [8]. This problem clearly is a deterrent to shipbuilders whose primary experience and expertise is in military systems and who wish to shift that expertise to commercial ships.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model elements in table 1 were used to develop question areas that measure the degree of innovation capacity inherent in an individual shipbuilding company or subgroup. These elements in most studies were found to be responsible for significant portions of the explainable variation in innovative capacity between different companies or groups [7,8,10,12,14,20,21]. INDUSTRY …”

Section: Development Of the Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The National Shipbuilding Research Program. 1997 Ship Production Symposium, Paper Number 19: A Computer-Aided Process for Assessing the Ability of Shipyards to Use Technological Innovation

Lannes¹,

Logan²,

Jovanovich³

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. DISCLAIMERThese reports were prepared as an account of government-sponsored work. Neither the United States, nor the United States Navy, nor any person acting on behalf of the United States Navy (A) makes any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information contained in this report/ manual, or that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privately owned rights; or (B) assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of or for damages resulting from the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in the report. As used in the above, "Persons acting on behalf of the United States Navy" includes any employee, contractor, or subcontractor to the contractor of the United States Navy to the extent that such employee, contractor, or subcontractor to the contractor prepares, handles, or distributes, or provides access to any information pursuant to his employment or contract or subcontract to the contractor with the United States Navy. ANY POSSIBLE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND/OR FITNESS FOR PURPOSE ARE SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMED. THE SOCIETY OF NAVAL ARCHITECTS AND MARINE ENGINEERS

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Development Of the Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The National Shipbuilding Research Program. 1997 Ship Production Symposium, Paper Number 19: A Computer-Aided Process for Assessing the Ability of Shipyards to Use Technological Innovation

Lannes¹,

Logan²,

Jovanovich³

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A major trend among existing studies has been a focus on variables that can be used to evaluate firm resources such as technological capabilities, financial ability and firm size. This implies that the potential to develop new technology itself has a positive influence on technology transfer commercialisation (Chiang, 1991;Bozeman and Coker, 1992). This is due to the fact that higher technological capabilities allow firms to absorb knowledge from external sources much more easily (Cohen and Levinthal, 1989), and even to find methods of applying technology developed in other fields to their own (Teece, 1986).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the potential for developing new technology lead to successful technology transfer commercialisation? The case of public R&D outputs in Korea

Yoon

Han

2017

IJMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the influence of major variables representing a firm's potential for developing new technology, such as an affiliation with a business group, possession of an independent R&D organisation, and technological capabilities, on technology transfer commercialisation. We selected firms that had signed contracts of technology transfer with a public research institution performing R&D and technology transfer in the field of information and communication technology as a sample. An event history analysis was carried out to predict the likelihood of successful commercialisation of the transferred technologies. Statistical results indicate that an affiliation with a large-scale business group and possession of an independent R&D organisation both had negative effects on the success of technology transfer commercialisation.

show abstract

“…[5] Market-facing operations and commercial ties are important factors for successful commercialization of technologies but not necessarily for technology transfer. [6] Historically, the laboratories performed research and distributed it into the public sector, usually through publication and other nonproprietary mechanisms. The typical nonproprietary mechanisms of technology transfer [7] are described below.…”

Section: National Laboratories and Technology Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[8] The policy foundation for technology transfer was enacted through three important pieces of federal legislation, listed below. [4,6,9] • The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (Pub. L. No.…”

Section: National Laboratories and Technology Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Ampulse Corporation: A Case Study on Technology Transfer in U.S. Department of Energy Laboratories

Perry¹

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer from US government R&D laboratories: the impact of market orientation

Cited by 46 publications

References 17 publications

The National Shipbuilding Research Program. 1997 Ship Production Symposium, Paper Number 19: A Computer-Aided Process for Assessing the Ability of Shipyards to Use Technological Innovation

The National Shipbuilding Research Program. 1997 Ship Production Symposium, Paper Number 19: A Computer-Aided Process for Assessing the Ability of Shipyards to Use Technological Innovation

Does the potential for developing new technology lead to successful technology transfer commercialisation? The case of public R&D outputs in Korea

Ampulse Corporation: A Case Study on Technology Transfer in U.S. Department of Energy Laboratories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About