Search

The nanotechnology and biotechnology 'revolutions' are so-called because their enabling technological breakthroughs were not simply inventions, but discoveries of entirely new methods of inventing. We hypothesize that university participants in either or both of these areas will exhibit greater collaboration with industry than researchers in other areas. We explore this hypothesis for 454 faculty members who conducted research that was patented during the period 1994-1999. Because our data include patents, publications, and funding at the individual level, we are able to examine the industry interaction of faculty who participated in the nanotechnology and biotechnology revolutions, as well as the interaction of faculty contributing to other areas of patentable science. We examine a variety of linkages, including sponsored research, consulting, publication with firm employees and measures of the potential for cross-campus collaboration. The results are striking in that they show significant differences in collaborative behavior across patent types and across the major program areas biological sciences, physical sciences and engineering. The results are consistent with a greater degree of tacit knowledge within the new methods of inventing. We also find significant differences in the embryonic nature and importance of patents across areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we extend our earlier work on science and engineering faculty disclosure and licensing activity to examine a characteristic of faculty ignored in our earlier work – the gender of faculty in our database of over 4500 faculty at 11 major universities. Not surprisingly, women comprise only 8.55% of the faculty in our sample. They are most represented in the biological sciences and the women in the sample are more likely to be younger faculty. The most striking result from highlighting women in the sample is that women are less likely to disclose inventions than men despite the fact that there are no significant differences in publication patterns. While disclosure activity varies by gender, we find that the disclosure activity of women and men converges over the period of our sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors previously explored invention licensing from the university's perspective. In this paper we focus on the process from the perspective of firms activity engaged in licensing technology. A survey of industry licensing professionals addresses why some firms license technologies from universities and why others do not. The paper then considers the stage of development of university technologies, the characteristics of their licensing contracts, and sources of information about university technologies, all to better understand how the process works and what advantages and disadvantages it offers to all participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes results of our survey of licensing at 62 research universities. We consider ownership, income splits, stage of development, marketing, license policies and characteristics, goals of licensing and the role of the inventor in licensing. Based on these results we analyze the relationship between licensing outcomes and both the objectives of the TTO and the characteristics of the technologies. Patent applications grow one-to-one with disclosures, while sponsored research grows similarly with licenses executed. Royalties are typically larger the higher the quality of the faculty and the higher the fraction of licenses that are executed at latter stages of development. Sponsored research is more likely to be included in a license if the new technology is at an early stage of development or if the TTO evaluates it as important. We find that additional disclosures generate smaller percentage increases in licenses, and those increases in licenses generate smaller percentage increases in royalties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]