Phasing Technology Transfer Projects for Sustainable Socio-Economic Development

Abstract

This paper describes appropriate phases and review points (or 'gates') for South African projects aimed at transferring technology for socio-economic development. Data gathering was done through a Delphi survey supplemented by a focus group session. A total of 42 knowledgeable respondents participated. The most significant phases of projects under consideration were confirmed, and relevant activities per phase and criteria for reviewing at the 'gates' between phases were identified. A total of 59% of resources should be made available for pre-and post-implementation activities, compared with the 41% of project resources to be made available during implementation. The causes of the failure of technology transfer projects under consideration were also identified. It is concluded that the use of a phased approach would improve the probability of project success. OPSOMMINGHierdie artikel beskryf die relevante fases en oorsig punte (of 'hekke') vir Suid-Afrikaanse projekte wat gemik is op die oordrag van tegnologie vir sosio-ekonomiese ontwikkeling. Die insameling van data is gedoen deur middel van 'n Delphi opname wat aangevul is met 'n fokusgroep. 'n Totaal van 42 kundige respondente het deelgeneem. Die mees beduidende fases van projekte onder bespreking is bevestig, en relevante aktiwiteite per fase asook kriteria vir oorsigpunte by die 'hekke' tussen die fases is geïdentifiseer. 'n Totaal van 59% van die hulpbronne behoort aangewend te word tydens die fases voor en na implementering, in vergeleke met 41% tydens implementering. Die oorsake vir mislukking van projekte onder bespreking is ook geïdentifiseer. Die gevolgtrekking word gemaak dat die gebruik van 'n gefaseerde benadering die waarskynlikheid van projek sukses behoort te verhoog.

Criteria For Selection And Gate Reviews Of Technology Innovation Projects

“…At the same time, the number of new and innovative products/services/processes decreases at each stage ( Figure 2) as the ideas with the greatest potential for commercialisation are pursued [28]. The objective of each phase is to reduce the risk to the subsequent phases in a cost-effective manner [29]. During the appraisal of the completed phase, a decision can be taken to terminate a project if there are no feasible risk mitigation plans or steps to follow during the subsequent phases.…”

“…Provided that the stakeholders accept the inherent risks, they might also decide to 'fast track' the project, by allowing it to proceed to the next phase without all the criteria being met. If the criteria have not been met, that has to be highlighted and documented, or the project could be terminated [24,29]. …”

“…Considering technical and commercial feasibility within the technology innovation investment context in a developing market like South Africa, and to obtain consensus, the Delphi method was considered most appropriate by a panel of experts, according to Mullen's [34] guidelines. Beukman and Steyn [29] concur that, in situations where less information is available, consensus methods such as Delphi, focus groups, or brainstorming are called for. Although Delphi is a relatively simple technique, many studies have shown it to be an effective method [35,36].…”

Entrepreneurial Intentions of Research Scientists and Engineers

“…As a result of such initiatives, more universities have established technology transfer offices for the purposes of increasing the commercialisation of university intellectual property [3,4,5]. It is increasingly recognised that academics need to be entrepreneurial to be successful in research, teaching, engagement in practice [6,7], and the commercialisation of academic knowledge [8,9].…”

“…Despite the research funding allocated to universities and public research organisations or science councils, only a small percentage of research outputs are commercialised in SA [10,11]. The support provided by technology transfer offices generally concentrates on the identification and protection of new intellectual property, with much less focus on start-up formation [3,7]. Additionally, not only is there a poor or lack of awareness and understanding of the technology innovation process in SA -including the commercialisation of inventions [10] -but the low rate of start-ups in South Africa has been attributed to many institutions' preference for licensing to established companies.…”