Investigation of academics’ opinion and expectations towards technology transfer offices

Abstract

THE AIMS OF THE PAPER

The central aim of the research is what kind of expectations academics have towards technology transfer offices and how can we segment academics based on their opinions and expectations? In this study, we approach these expectations from the academics point of view that can contribute to a more successful management of technology transfer with a deeper understanding of academics.

METHODOLOGY

In this study, 660 academics took part and responded for our call. Based on their answers, we distinguished four clusters of scientists and determined those groups of tasks that perceive scientists similar and relates to technology transfer processes.

MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS

Although a significant proportion of scientists are aware of the technology transfer office in their own institution, only a small share of academics were engaged in collaboration with the technology transfer office in the last 5 years. In case of collaboration-oriented scientists the main responsibility of the technology transfer office should be to determine the commercializable invention, while the technology transfer offices should also improve their reputation among consultancy-oriented scientists.

RECOMMENDATIONS

As the results highlighted, academics recognize the lack of resources (financial and human resources) at the technology transfer offices. Thus, technology transfer offices should approach consultancy-oriented scientists and collaboration-oriented scientists with their services – besides the commercialization-oriented scientists – since these clusters can be involved more easily in technology transfer due to their experiences and attitudes – than the traditional scientists. While the collaboration-oriented scientists need assistance in determining the commercializable scientific inventions, the image of the technology transfer offices should be improved among consultancy-oriented scientists.

Acknowledgements: This study was supported by the European Social Fund through project (grant no.: TÁMOP-4.1.1.C-12/1/KONV-2012-0004).