TY - JOUR
T1 - Distinguishing between knowledge transfer and technology transfer activities
T2 - The role of key organizational factors
AU - Gopalakrishnan, Shanthi
AU - Santoro, Michael D.
N1 - Funding Information:
In this study, knowledge transfer and technology transfer activities were examined within the context of I/U relationships. While I/U relationships can manifest themselves in many ways, e.g., consulting arrangements with individual faculty or contract research, we concentrated on industrial firms’ relationships with university research centers. University research centers including the NSF supported Engineering Research Centers (ERCs) and Industry–University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRC’s) were our major focal point. University research centers such as these have an explicit mission to work with industry to advance knowledge and new technologies through an array of relationship alternatives that facilitate this mission [4], [38]. To better understand the dynamics of I/U relationships within this venue, two different sources of exploratory data were initially obtained. First, an analysis of 12 recent NSF program evaluations and survey protocols were examined. Next, 15 semistruc-tured, face-to-face and phone interviews were conducted with industrial firm representatives and university center directors.
Funding Information:
The conceptual framework for this paper is built around two key notions. First, knowledge and technology are distinct constructs such that each type of transfer entails different kinds of activities, is often undertaken by different personnel within the organization, and involves different kinds of interactions and procedures [2], [5]. Second, while knowledge transfer and technology transfer are different, both are important value-creating activities that occur over time and within the rubric of certain organizational factors that are related to and important for interorganizational collaboration [49]. Within the context of I/U relationships, certain factors in both the industrial firm and the university may be consequential. To narrow the scope of this study, we concentrate on factors related only to the industrial firm since the National Science Foundation (NSF) and others have already focused much attention on the university, (see, for example, [4], [6], [36], and [37]) leaving the industrial firm side of these relationships less studied.
PY - 2004/2
Y1 - 2004/2
N2 - Knowledge transfer and technology transfer are often used interchangeably and while both knowledge transfer and technology transfer are highly interactive activities, they serve different purposes. Knowledge transfer implies a broader, more inclusive construct that is directed more toward understanding the "whys" for change. In contrast, technology transfer is a narrower and more targeted construct that usually embodies certain tools for changing the environment. Grounding our work in the 7-S framework, we examine the role of key organizational factors in facilitating knowledge transfer and technology transfer activities. Survey data for this study were collected from 189 industrial firms representing 21 different industrial sectors. Results show that there are differences in the types of firm structures, cultures and university policies for intellectual property rights (IPR), patent ownership, and licensing that facilitated knowledge transfer activities compared to those that facilitated technology transfer activities. Specifically, firms with more mechanistic structures and more stable direction-oriented cultures were associated with higher levels of knowledge transfer. Conversely, firms with more organic structures, more flexible change-oriented cultures, and more customized university policies for IPR, patent ownership, and licensing were associated with higher levels of technology transfer. The firm's trust in its university research center partner was equally important for both activities. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for future research and management practice.
AB - Knowledge transfer and technology transfer are often used interchangeably and while both knowledge transfer and technology transfer are highly interactive activities, they serve different purposes. Knowledge transfer implies a broader, more inclusive construct that is directed more toward understanding the "whys" for change. In contrast, technology transfer is a narrower and more targeted construct that usually embodies certain tools for changing the environment. Grounding our work in the 7-S framework, we examine the role of key organizational factors in facilitating knowledge transfer and technology transfer activities. Survey data for this study were collected from 189 industrial firms representing 21 different industrial sectors. Results show that there are differences in the types of firm structures, cultures and university policies for intellectual property rights (IPR), patent ownership, and licensing that facilitated knowledge transfer activities compared to those that facilitated technology transfer activities. Specifically, firms with more mechanistic structures and more stable direction-oriented cultures were associated with higher levels of knowledge transfer. Conversely, firms with more organic structures, more flexible change-oriented cultures, and more customized university policies for IPR, patent ownership, and licensing were associated with higher levels of technology transfer. The firm's trust in its university research center partner was equally important for both activities. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for future research and management practice.
KW - Industry-university relationships
KW - Knowledge transfer
KW - Organizational context
KW - Technology transfer
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1542375895&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1542375895&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/TEM.2003.822461
DO - 10.1109/TEM.2003.822461
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:1542375895
SN - 0018-9391
VL - 51
SP - 57
EP - 69
JO - IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
JF - IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
IS - 1
ER -