Technology Transfer between Universities and Companies: Two Cases of Brazilian Universities Outros Idiomas

ID:
51560
Resumo:
PURPOSE - This paper aims to research how technology transfer occurs, based on the Schumpeterian approach to innovation trilogy focusing on the interaction between the university and the company. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH - The methodology used for this study was the analysis of two cases with an exploratory and qualitative approach. The case study subjects were two Brazilian universities: University of Campinas (UNICAMP) and University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS). Semi-structured interviews were used as the data collection technique, whereas content analysis was used as the analysis technique. FINDINGS - The main results showed the need of companies and universities to understand that working in collaborative technology research contributes to the transformation of applied research into technological innovations that can transform society. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS - The research’s limitations were the unfeasibility of studying the government helix, the lack of clear and established processes within universities so that a comparison between the cases would be possible and the lack of access to technology contracts, as they are considered confidential. In addition, the use of two cases is considered a limitation, as it is not possible to generalize the conclusions pointed out by the study. ORIGINALITY/VALUE - With this research, the authors were able to conclude that the university–industry interaction process has been improving, but it still needs to advance in organizational aspects. Some of the aspects to be considered are the adjustments for the institutions’ internal policies, the existing negotiations, the researchers’ behaviour regarding the dissemination of the innovation culture and the performance of the technological innovation canters, which gradually are being trained to work in the market as well as in the university. It is necessary that primarily companies and universities understand that they must join efforts in collaborative technological research, so that the financial resources invested are not only accepted as published articles in qualified journals but also turn into technological innovations accepted by the market. All this investment must return as new products, services and technologies that generate local, regional Keywords Innovation, Technology transfer, Case study, University–industry interaction, Brazilian universities
Citação ABNT:
CHAIS, C.; GANZER, P. P.; OLEA, P. M. Technology Transfer between Universities and Companies: Two Cases of Brazilian Universities. Revista de Administração e Inovação, v. 15, n. 1, p. 20-40, 2018.
Citação APA:
Chais, C., Ganzer, P. P., & Olea, P. M. (2018). Technology Transfer between Universities and Companies: Two Cases of Brazilian Universities. Revista de Administração e Inovação, 15(1), 20-40.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-02-2018-002
Link Permanente:
http://www.spell.org.br/documentos/ver/51560/technology-transfer-between-universities-and-companies--two-cases-of-brazilian-universities/i/pt-br
Tipo de documento:
Artigo
Idioma:
Inglês
Referências:
Arocena, R.; Sutz, J. (2000). Looking at national systems of innovation from the South. Industry and Innovation, vol. 7, n. 1, pp. 55-75.

Borges, C.; Filion, L.J. (2013). Spin-off process and the development of academic entrepreneur’s social Capital. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, v. 8, n. 1.

Bozeman, B.; Rimes, H.; Youtie, J. (2015). The evolution of state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the effectiveness contingent model. Research Policy, vol. 44, n. 1, pp. 34-49.

Bray, M.; Lee, J. (2000). University revenues from technology transfer: licensing fees vs. Equity positions. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 15, n. 5/6.

Carayannis, E. G.; Rogers, E. M.; Kurihara, K.; Allbritton, M. M. (1998). High-technology spin-offs from government R&D laboratories and research universities. Technovation, vol. 18, n. 1.

Carayol, N. (2003). Objectives, agreements and matching in science-industry collaborations: reassembling the pieces of the puzzle. Research Policy, vol. 32, n. 6, pp. 887-908.

Chang, Y.; Yang, P. Y.; Martin, B. R.; Chi, H. R.; Lin, T. F. T. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities and research ambidexterity: a multilevel analysis. Technovation, vol. 54, pp. 7-21.

Chiaradia, A. J. P. (2004). Utilização do indicador de eficiência global de equipamentos na gestão e melhoria contínua dos equipamentos: um estudo de caso na indústria automobilística. Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre.

Closs, L.; Ferreira, G.; Sampaio, C.; Perin, M. (2012). Intervenientes na transferência de tecnologia universidade-empresa: o caso PUCRS. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, vol. 16 n. 1, pp. 59-78.

Cribb, A. Y. (2009). Determinantes da transferência de tecnologia na agroindústria brasileira de alimento: identificação e caracterização. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, vol. 4 n. 3.

Cysne, F. P. (2005). Transferência de tecnologia entre a universidade E a indústria. Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, vol. 20, pp. 54-74.

Denzin, N. K.; Lincoln, Y. S. (2008), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA. vol. 3, p. 701.

Drucker, P. F. (1985). The discipline of innovation. Harvard Business Review, vol. 63 n. 3.

Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, vol. 32 n. 1, pp. 109-121.

Etzkowitz, H. (2016). Innovation lodestar: the entrepreneurial university in a stellar knowledge firmament. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 123.

Etzkowitz, H.; Andrew, W.; Peter, H. (1998), Capitalizing Knowledge: New Intersections of Industry and Academia: IV Series, University of New York Press, New York.

Etzkowitz, H.; Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university - industry - government relations. Research Policy, vol. 29, pp. 109-123.

Etzkowitz, H.; Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The future of university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, vol. 29, pp. 313-330.

Fassin, Y. (2000). Innovation and ethics ethical considerations in the innovation business. Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 27, n. 1/2, pp. 193-203.

FINEP. (2015). Financiadora de Estudos e Pesquisas.Marcos Historicos. www.finep.gov.br/pagina.asp?pag=10.10.

Franco, M.; Haase, H. (2015). University-industry cooperation: researchers’ motivations and interaction channels. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 36, pp. 41-51.

Frascati Manual. (2002). Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, OECD, Paris.

Freeman, C.; Perez, C. (1988). Structural crises of adjustment business, cycles and investment behaviour. in Dosi, G. et al. (Eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory, Pinter Publishers, London.

Garnica, L. A. (2007). Transferência de tecnologia e gestão da propriedade intelectual em universidades públicas no Estado de São Paulo. Dissertação de Mestrado, UFSCar, São Carlos.

Gonçalves, E. J. V. (2012). Análise e desenvolvimento de modelos de negocio em spin-offs acadêmicos: um estudo junto às empresas da INBATEC/UFLA. Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras.

Guerrero, M.; Urbano, D. (2014). Academics’ start-up intentions and knowledge filters: an individual perspective of the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, vol. 43 n. 1, pp. 57-74.

Guerrero, M.; Urbano, D. (2016). The impact of triple helix agents on entrepreneurial innovations’ performance: Na inside look at enterprises located in an emerging economy. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 28 n. 3.

Hanna, N.; Guy, K.; Arnold, E. (1995). The diffusion of information technology: experience of industrial countries and lessons for developing countries. World Bank: Discussion Papers, p. 281.

INOVA. (2015). Universidade Estadual de Campinas. INOVA UNICAMP, São Paulo, www.inova.unicamp.br/sobre.

INOVA. (2016). Universidade Estadual de Campinas.Relatorio de atividades 2012. Inova UNICAMP: São Paulo. www.inova.unicamp.br/sobre/relatorios

Lima, F. D. (2010). O Papel dos NITs nas ICTs e as ações do Fortec. Forum Nacional de Gestores de Inovação e Transferência de Tecnologia - Fortec, Terezina, Piauí.

Nelson, R.; Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Oslo Manual. (2005). Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, OECD Publishing, Luxembourg.

Pérez, M.; Sánchez, A. M. (2003). The development of university spin-offs: early dynamics of technology transfer and networking. Technovation, vol. 23 n. 10.

Perkmann, M.; King, Z.; Pavelin, S. (2011). Engaging excellence?Effects of faculty quality on industry engagement across disciplines. Research Policy, vol. 40 n. 4, pp. 539-552.

Quetglás, G. M.; Grau, B. C. (2002). Aspects of university research and technology transfer to private industry. Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 39, n. 1/2, pp. 51-58.

Reckziegel, V.; Pampanelli, A.; Dalvitte, F.; Brehm, F.; Kulakowski, M.; Moraes, C. (2013). Bioblock: Tijolo Ecologico, Document made available by the University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, SAE International, Pennsylvania.

Rogers, E. M. (1971), Diffusion of Innovations. Collier Macmillan Publishers: London.

Rogers, E. M.; Takegami, S.; Yin, J. (2001). Lessons learned about technology transfer. Technovation, vol. 21, n. 4.

Roman, D. D.; Puett Junior, J. F. (1983), International Business and Technological Innovation, Elsevier Science Publishing, New York.

Sankat, C.; Pun, K. P.; Motilal, C. B. (2007). Technology transfer for agro-industries in developing nations: a Caribbean perspective. International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, vol. 6 , n. 6.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. Harper: New York.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1961). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Oxford University: New York. p. 255.

Song, X. (1998). University technology transfer and commercialization: a cost and benefit-sharing process. Faculty Bulletin, vol. 62, pp. 1-14.

Stoneman, P.; Diederen, P. (1994). Technology diffusion and public policy. The Economic Journal, vol. 104, n. 425, pp. 918-930.

Trajtenberg, M.; Yitzhaki, S. (1989). The diffusion of innovations: a methodological reappraisal. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, vol. 7, n. 1, pp. 35-47.

Velasquez, M. (2010). Development, justice, and technology transfer in China: the case of HP and legend. Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 89, pp. 157-166.

Wolcott, H.F. (1994), Transforming Qualitative Data: description, Analysis, and Interpretation. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks.

Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, vol. 19, n. 3, pp. 321-332.