Technology Transfer Systems
c/o TEI of Serres
terma Magnisias
621 22 Serres - Greece
There are several definitions of the
term "technology", all of which are concerned with creation of tools,
instruments, techniques or methods of improving welfare.
Technology has been used and continues
to be used by entrepreneurs (to maximise profits), by researchers (to expand their research) and by inventors
(often, to invent something new).
Locations where technology is invented
(or improved) range from Universities, government-funded Research Centres and
private or corporate laboratories to an inventor's workbench.
Most often, technology development is
tightly coupled to financial rewards.
Questions of creation, diffusion and
application of technological achievements typically arise but, the bottom line is that the marketplace rewards
whatever a given community (in its historical context), considers of economic
value.
Following the hypothesis that the
marketplace is the key driving force behind technology development and that
such development adheres to market rules (especially to the demand side of the
supply-and-demand approaches), it can be concluded that: the technology that
generates the highest demand is the one promising improved welfare and that,
technology may be considered as an essential "commodity" or even as a
"service". In addition,
technological advancements aiming to improve welfare are driven by
profit-seeking corporate interests or by "vote seeking" state-owned
non-profit organisations.
A technology transfer system is
important for knowledge-based industries and may be defined as a synergistic
and co-operative activity between an inventor and a set of agreements, rules
and regulations that facilitate technology transfer. A formal system for technology transfer has to take into
consideration market demand, the modus operandi of an inventor, the need to
provide high coverage of intellectual property and, at the same time, to
provide increased speed of technology-transfer and to have a high potential for
successful commercialisation.
In this presentation, a proposal for a system of technology transfer for a regional, national, pan-European and international markets will be discussed using empirical observations and heuristics.
The latter part of the twentieth century has been called
"information age" and, an infoglut is bombarding even the average
citizen. Even though information
technology was supposed to diminish the cost of information and, while it is
true that the cost of information storage and retrieve has diminished, rapid
conversion of vast amounts of data to information gives corporations (and
countries) a competitive advantage.
This has been recognized by many, as data mining and rapid
data-to-information conversion approaches are active areas of current research.
Information technologies, such as the internet, offer the ability to
deliver goods and services even to the geographically-remote markets.
Electronic commerce is a classic example of this and inevitably, this is
expected to lead to global competition.
This trend to globalization is currently underway as exemplified by a
shift in market-forces from being marketing-driven to
high-volume-and-lower-cost achieved through mergers and take-overs, up to
financial conglomerations, relying on just their colossal money power.
Technology is particularly important for Small and Medium Size
Enterprises (SMSEs) which must rely on innovation in order to compete
effectively on a world market. Since
technology and innovation are central
to the very survival of SMSEs, they will be discussed in some detail in
what follows.
There are several definitions of
technology. Some stress the attention on the character, some on the usefulness,
others on the nature.
My own proposal for a definition of
technology is:
Any human articraft or method intended
to substitute or multiply human effort in activities that satisfy needs,
desires or mere curiosity.
Technology does not necessarily rely on
invention or discovery, although inventions are the most common starting point.
Technology relies on science and
science starts from philosophy. Research does not necessarily lead to
technology, because the result may be a "theory", a
"method" or an "application" of knowledge.
A distinction among the term
"technology" and other similar terms is useful, not for just
understanding the nature, but also in order to stretch the systems dealing with
technology, without overlapping with other maters.
Invention is an application of
established knowledge combining the features of materials or methods in a way
that creates new possible use of them.
Discovery is a statement deriving from
the systematic observation of the behaviour of objects or persons, expressed
for the first time. In other words discovery is the verification of a theory.
It is possible to have articrafts
resulting from either inventions or discoveries, but technology is again the
vehicle that carries them from the state of the ideas to the state of the
usefulness.
Although everyone uses technology, the
limit here is the use by productive organisations, such as enterprises,
government and local authorities, syndicates, co-operatives etc, not individuals
as citizens or consumers.
The participation of technology in the
production of wealth is then evident, nevertheless it does not represent the
only way. Cost maters affect the decision of the introduction of technology in
such a way that it may prove the abolishment of technologically
"advanced" systems more profitable, whatever the consideration of
"profit" may be.
There are also other reasons to avoid
technology, such as the image of "hand made" or
"traditional" products, leading to better prices in the marketplace
or follow a decision that increases employment in a region.
Technology, with or without an initial
know-how, is used to increase production or sales and / or decrease costs and /
or secure quality of the products, leading to profitability.
Technology is also used to realise
business ideas, making the creation of new products or services (with or
without their own intrinsic technology) possible.
Articrafts, methods and know-how,
create wealth by diminishing the consumption of production factors (such as
labour and land), substituting them partly by capital and increase the output
of commodities and or services.
By doing so, the producer's
competitively increases and at least local development is achieved.
A collateral effect of technology is
the perpetuation of the introduction of technology, because technology creates
hunger for technology since in the global competition the need for
"competitive advantages" is always evident and leads to the necessity
to introduce more and more technologically advanced "items". From a
different point of view, technologically advanced systems need adequate
training systems that require their own technology, maintenance with an
adequate tool set, suppliers with sophisticated systems, quality control, security
and so on.
Technology
is being created in several places. There is no specific technology creation
place or procedure. It may be feasible to identify the stimuli of technology
creation or procedures that facilitate the emergence of already "thought
of" technological items, but there is not yet a general rule.
The
usual places, where technology is created and presented, are discussed in the
following.
Although
Universities are not meant to create technology, traditionally limited to
"basic research", there is more and more evidence of their
involvement in industrial applications throughout four main lines of action:
·
Applied research in co-operation with industrial firms.
·
Research leading to possible applications.
·
Applied research ordered by the society.
·
Consulting work, requiring a minimal of research.
In
all cases the technology created (even under the aspect of know-how) and then
transferred to the world of applications, is more individual and less
institutional. It is the persons that trigger the co-operation between the
institutions, the Universities on one side and the productive entities on the
other, not the institutions.
There
are plenty of explanations for this behaviour, which at the first glance looks
like a paradox. One of the most popular is that both enterprises and
Universities tend to trust the commitment of individuals, assuming, either by
logical conclusions or experience, that research needs personal devotion and
inspiration.
The
academic world in Europe is organised in democratic entities, in order to
prevent the limitations in thoughts expression and the obstacles posed to the
diffusion of ideas. This protection of the freedom of speech is creating a
side-effect, the one of the necessity of having collective approval of research
goals, procedure and even the purposes. The consensus needs homogeneity and
this is a force acting against initiative.
New
technology is a result of a breakthrough with it’s roots in a personal
ambition, while basic research is in line with a theoretical approach and in
the long term is producing scalar improvement of scientific knowledge.
While
basic research is motivated by academic incentives, such as papers, academic
career and fame, requiring discipline, technological research by academic staff
has no other incentives but just payment, which is considered very vulgar, if
not fraud.
In
spite of the lack of motivation and the unfavourable environment of the
academic institutions, technology is created by individual initiative
exploiting the facilities, the scientific knowledge base, investment risk-free
activities and credibility of both the academic staff as elected to be such and
the institutions themselves.
Specific scientific fields have been
the base for the creation of Research Centres, in order to create the
technology needed by a specific sector of the economy.
Those research centres have been
created by several different social groups, as well as the government, in order
to investigate the possibilities of developing technologies and know-how, with
a clear target that can be referred as “improvement of productivity”.
They are characterised by their
tendency to become more academic than technology oriented, just because the
incentives of the academic motivation of the researchers is the criterion of
their career within the research centres themselves. The criterion is not wrong
and whenever the relations between those centres and use of the results by the
organisations that created them becomes loose, remains the only one.
The assumption that Universities and
Research Centres are in competition does not verify. The target market for the
products of the research centres are rather the Universities than the
industries, which benefit the researchers.
The creation of technology is meeting
the expectations of both the governmental policy, often referred as strategy
and the personal promotion of the researchers.
With or without the appropriate
department and the corresponding budget for research and development,
technology is created within the industrial establishments.
In small and medium size enterprises,
technology creation is usually promoted by the entrepreneur and has the form of
new machinery development. This equipment is usually developed in order to
cover specific productive needs, because it is not offered in the market, it is
not known that there is a market availability or it is considered to cost less
than what is offered.
The equipment produced this way is
hardly documented and it is produced through a try and error procedure. In most
cases it is not even designed, being based only on the idea of the workers that
can make it. Through the same procedure come also the production methods.
Bigger enterprises, especially those
with an experience of quality assessment like ISO, follow some rules in their
research of both production methods and equipment. In most big companies there
is a special Research and Development department that carries out the work of
creating new products, new production methods or new equipment, with a distinct
budget.
In all cases, it is the management unit
of the enterprise (in SMEs the owner himself) to guide the research, having
already in mind a rough idea of the research outcome, convincing enough to
permit him to pay for it’s creation.
Again in all cases, the management unit
is considering the achievements of the research done, in respect of the
products, methods or equipment developed, a competitive advantage, a valuable,
though intangible, asset of their enterprise and a secret to be kept from their
competitors.
Many
individuals are trying to create new products, even if they are not involved in
any kind of enterprise. They usually identify a market need and they try to
develop a product satisfying it.
They
rarely try to develop productive procedures or productive equipment since they
rarely have any previous experience of an enterprise, either as owners or mere
workers.
Their
invention is usually in paper and they tend to patent it. If a prototype is
required, they ask someone else, a person with a laboratory that they trust, to
make it for them.
They
find it very difficult to distinguish between a market idea and technology
creation.
Some
of them, especially engineers, really create new technology with an adequate
documentation and some dose of innovation. In these cases there is not any
system or procedure to promote their technology, after an evaluation of it’s
functionality and an assessment of the possibility to apply it.
Technology
creation is a procedure that involves several parts of the economic system. The
most important seem to be:
·
The motivation of the researchers.
·
The research facilities.
·
The criteria of assignment of the research work.
·
The assessment system.
·
The market structure.
·
The documentation.
The patent system and the intellectual
property protection means.
Technology creation is very close to
innovation. There are plenty of innovative minds with hardly any ability to
create or even understand technology. In a corporate technology creation they
trigger the research and engineering of collective work, either as idea
generators, research animators or just the stars in brainstorming sessions.
Although technology creation is a
collective work, there is always the need of a leader who will get either the
benefits or the glory of a successful outcome.
Technology
transfer has to be seen as an implementation of the technology created in a
productive entity. This requires:
·
That the user knows about the technology created.
·
That the user knows how to obtain the rights to use it.
·
That the user is sure the technology works.
·
That the user has evaluated the participation of this
technology in the effectiveness of his entity.
The usual
marketplace for technology, especially when it is incorporated in equipment, is
the organised expositions and the direct connection of technology creation
entities with the production entities.
This marketplace gives the opportunity
to the user to buy the equipment or to make an agreement to use a production
method. It is obvious that the same possibilities have his competitors.
Exclusive use in a limited territory does not really offer any protection in
the global competition.
Direct
connection of the technology creating entities with the user raise a lot of
limitations, such as:
·
How does the question on cost benefit calculations is
answered?
·
Who and how answers the question of feasibility?
·
How can replication be prevented?
·
How is the price calculated?
These
questions make obvious that it is necessary to entrust an intermediary capable
of covering the three aspects of such deals:
·
The economic evaluation.
·
The technical feasibility.
·
The legal protection.
The
intermediary, as such, has to be trustworthy, because all of the three aspects
may create the temptation to lead the benefits to the intermediary instead of
the user and the technology creator.
Such
intermediaries usually are:
Consulting
companies.
·
Non profit or non
governmental entities, participating in International Organisations, that
guarantee their ethical function.
·
Governmental bodies.
·
Liaison Offices (between Education-Research and Industry).
Those intermediaries tend
to channel the demand for technology to the creators of technology that are expected
to be more convenient to them.
It is, therefore, an easy conclusion
that something else has to be done, in order to make technology transfer a tool
for development.
Technology is considered as an item
with a market value, so is treated as an object of common commerce. This
consideration has leaded to the same techniques of promotion as commodities and
services.
The usual promotion tools are:
·
Fairs and expositions.
·
Advertisement.
·
Direct mail.
·
Direct sales.
The aim of
these promotional activities is:
·
To sell equipment with
incorporated technology.
·
To make contracts for research work.
·
To make franchising contracts.
·
To sell technology use royalties.
The
marketing methods are implemented by the offering side, so that the products or
services will be sold to the users. Except the producers of equipment with
incorporated technology that also use marketing to adapt their products to the
needs of the potential users, all the other technology creators are using just
the promotional activities.
The
liberalisation of the markets, the lift of restrictions, as well as new aspects
of regulations, such as environmental and ethical issues, that all led to the
globalisation of the economy, have concentrated the competition on two
abilities of the enterprises:
·
The ability to plan and control, known as management.
·
The ability to use technology which meets the requirements
of:
·
Creating products that satisfy the consumers desires.
·
Respecting the environment and the consumers’ health.
·
Permitting a constant quality of the products.
·
Creating a global competitive advantage, thus profits.
Although, as a
result of the discoveries that over-exploitation of nature has produced
dangerous commodities, there is a tendency to return to the consumption of
goods produced the most natural way, it is also common sense that these
side-effects can only be eliminated through quality control, procedure
improvement and consumer information.
It is expected
that the demand of technology will remain constant by all the economic actors,
such as:
·
The productive enterprises.
·
The government control bodies.
·
The consumer associations.
The
demand side is always looking for the less expensive way to best satisfy the
needs or desires for a better performance.
The supply
side is always looking for better prices and / or bigger sales volumes.
For both
sides, since the demand side is not the final consumer but is a profit seeking
entity, the interests are common. Both sides want long term regular results.
The dominating
factor in this industrial market is information. Enterprises and social
organisations spend a lot of money in subscriptions in special magazines,
visits to expositions and fairs, participation to seminars and presentations,
even visits to the producers’ sites, while the supply side is doing exactly the
same.
Intermediaries,
on the other hand, are putting all promotional efforts in convincing both the
supply and the demand side, that they are capable of advising for the best and
trustworthy in the same time.
This
traditional, in the sense of imitating the commodities and services market
rules, way of acting in the case of technology seems by far obsolete.
Another kind
of market for technology is emerging, with three main characteristics:
·
It is information oriented.
·
It concentrates attention on the assessment ability of the
intermediaries.
·
It is innovation and quality sensitive.
A technology transfer system creation and management is not an easy
task. There are risks to keep it very private and so limit the access to whom
already has a culture for innovative technology, on one side, or to make it
very public and so loose the potential users.
The market for technology, has to be, by definition, the Small and
Medium size Enterprises, because:
ü
It is
from today’s SMEs that big future companies will emerge.
They outnumber the big companies, both in cumulative size (capital
invested, number of employees, total sales, markets that they are present,
profits and so on), representing a wider and diversified market.
ü
They
are more innovative and they adopt and use new technology more easily than big
companies. Big companies base their activities on their stability and so they
tend to follow established technologies with little innovation. When they have
a breakthrough technology in their hands they either wait that someone else
will launch it. In order to avoid the risk, they use a series of alternatives,
such as:
ü
They create spin-off companies with
some of the researchers, engineers or other personnel members.
ü
They create their own new SMEs to
test the technology and it’s market impact.
ü
They provide venture or risk capital
together with the technology to emerging SMEs.
Yet they protect their patents. They apply to the patents offices, they
pay lawyers to look for infringements and prosecute anyone who attempts to copy
it. They apply it in dimensions that are financially prohibitive to the
competitors; even competitors of equal or bigger size are not prepared for such
investments and, of course, they keep it secret.
An information system, addressed to SMEs, on one side, and the
Researchers, on the other, as well as a local middle agent, has to satisfy the
needs of all the actors in an affordable way.
As for every information system, there are some elements to take into
consideration, study and plan. The most important of those elements are:
ü
Information
technology, as a means of communication and information storing and retrieving.
This includes all, from equipment to programs, connection lines, protocols,
standards to follow etc. There should be explicitly set both the technology at
the start-up phase and the indicators that will signal the initiation of
improvement. In general terms the starting technology should be well
established and accessible for everyone.
ü
A
thorough plan of trust, permissions, guarantees, security, as well as
re-compensation for failures to whoever is not following the rules, in an
immediate way, without having to follow the legal procedures.
ü
A
training system for the intermediary agents to keep them updated with both
information technology development and the technologies they handle, since they
will act as consultants.
ü
A
promotional system that does not compromise the secrecy needed.
ü
A
general guide for good conduct concerning all the participating actors.
ü
Legal
documents to bound all parties, concerning secrecy, obligations, payments,
guarantees, expirations and exits.
Such an
information system has to be at a large level, European at least, if not
global. So it has to be based on an existing network, such as Innovation Relay
Centers, Business and Innovation Centers, Innovation Response Network etc. that
the European Commission created for similar reasons.
Such a
decentralized intervention has the quality of being able to establish personal
relations with the local actors and lead to their assessment. No information
system is able to assess trust, but the challenge is how to transform personal
judgments into impartial transportable, confidential and global data.
REFERENCES
[1] Authors, Conference Title, City, Country, YEAR, Date, Page numbers
[2] Authors, Conference Title, City, Country, YEAR, Date, Page numbers
[3] Authors, Conference Title, City, Country, YEAR, Date, Page numbers
[4] Authors, Journal, Volume number, Edition, YEAR, Page numbers
[5] Authors, Conference Title, City, Country, YEAR, Date, Page numbers
[6] Authors, Conference Title, City, Country, YEAR, Date, Page numbers
[7] Authors, Conference Title, City, Country, YEAR, Date, Page numbers
[8] Authors, Journal, Volume number, Edition, YEAR, Page numbers
[9] Authors, Journal, Volume number, Edition, YEAR, Page numbers
[10] Authors, Journal, Volume number, Edition, YEAR, Page numbers
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
fgfpqrstuvwxy Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz