A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda

Kristel Miller, Rodney McAdam, Maura McAdam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Within recent years, there has been a rapid expansion of the University's role in economic development. This has resulted in University Technology Transfer (UTT) taking place within an increasingly complex network of regional stakeholders. This complexity has resulted in quadruple helix models where the triple helix model of academia, industry and regional government now includes societal based innovation users as a fourth helix. Despite this development, extant research is fragmented and lacks coherent frameworks and conceptualisations which fully depict the dynamic and evolving nature of UTT. Accordingly, this article reviews Mode 2 UTT from a quadruple helix perspective to identify key themes to develop a research agenda which reflects progression from a triple into a quadruple helix ecosystem.
LanguageEnglish
JournalR&D Management
Volume0
Early online date25 Jul 2016
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 25 Jul 2016

Fingerprint

Literature review
Research agenda
University technology transfer
Progression
Complex networks
Ecosystem
Mode 2
User innovation
Economic development
Regional government
Triple helix model
Stakeholders
Industry
Conceptualization

Keywords

  • systematic literature review
  • university technology transfer

Cite this

@article{cf038c36170a4ef4837e2658b8976970,
title = "A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda",
abstract = "Within recent years, there has been a rapid expansion of the University's role in economic development. This has resulted in University Technology Transfer (UTT) taking place within an increasingly complex network of regional stakeholders. This complexity has resulted in quadruple helix models where the triple helix model of academia, industry and regional government now includes societal based innovation users as a fourth helix. Despite this development, extant research is fragmented and lacks coherent frameworks and conceptualisations which fully depict the dynamic and evolving nature of UTT. Accordingly, this article reviews Mode 2 UTT from a quadruple helix perspective to identify key themes to develop a research agenda which reflects progression from a triple into a quadruple helix ecosystem.",
keywords = "systematic literature review, university technology transfer",
author = "Kristel Miller and Rodney McAdam and Maura McAdam",
note = "Reference text: Abreu, M. and Grinevich, V. (2013) The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities. Research Policy, 42, 408–422. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 19 Abreu, M., Grinevich, V., Hughes, A., and Kitson, M. (2009) Knowledge Exchange between Academics and the Business, Public and Third Sectors, Centre for Business Research. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. Almirall, E. and Wareham, J. (2011) Living labs: arbiters of mid- and ground-level innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 23, 87–102. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 13 Al-Mubaraki, A., Mubarak, H., and Busier, M. (2013) Business incubation as an economic development strategy: a literature Review. International Journal of Management, 30, 362–367. Ambos, T.C., Makela, K., Birkinshaw, J., and D'este, P. (2008) When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1424–1447. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 64 Arnkil, R., J{\"a}rvensivu, A., Koski, P., and Piirainen, T. (2010) Exploring Quadruple Helix – Outlining user-Oriented Innovation Models. Finland: University of Tampere, Institute for Social Research, Work Research Centre. Asheim, B.T. and Coenen, L. (2005) Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing nordic clusters. Research Policy, 34, 1173–1190. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 304 Barca, F., McCann, P., and Rodr{\'i}guez-Pose, A. (2012) The case for regional development intervention: place-based versus place-neutral approaches. Journal of Regional Science, 52, 134–152. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 101 Becheikh, N., Landry, R., and Amara, N. (2006) Lessons from innovation empirical studies in the manufacturing sector: a systematic review of the literature from 1993-2003. Technovation, 26, 644–664. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 137 Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M.P. (2006) Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: a conceptual framework for understanding Knowledge-based economic Development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 175–188. CrossRef Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M. (2008) Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19, 69–89. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 177 Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., and Burton, R. (2001) Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: an exploratory study of duke, johns hopkins, and pennsylvania state universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 21–35. CrossRef Bozeman, B. (2000) Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29, 627–655. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 332 Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., and Youtie, J. (2015) The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: revisiting the contingent effectiveness model. Research Policy, 44, 34–49. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 3 Camagni, R. and Capello, R. (2013) Regional innovation patterns and the EU regional policy reform: toward smart innovation policies. Growth and Change, 44, 355–389. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 25 Campbell, E.G., Powers, J.B., Blumenthal, D., and Biles, B. (2004) Inside the triple helix: technology transfer and commercialization in the life Sciences. Health Affairs, 23, 64–76. CrossRef | PubMed | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 20 Carayannis, E.G. and Campbell, D.F.J. (2009) “Mode 3” and “quadruple helix”: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46, 201–234. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 67 Carayannis, E.G. and Campbell, D.F.G. (2014) Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: arts, democracy, and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 3, 12–24. CrossRef Carayannis, E.G. and Rakhmatullin, R. (2014) The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in europe and Beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5, 212–239. CrossRef Carayannis, E.G., Barth, R.D., and Campbell, D.F.J. (2012) The quinuple helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1, 1–12. CrossRef Chesbrough, H. (2007) Why companies should have open business models. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48, 22–28. Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 114 Cao, Y., Zhao, L., and Chen, R. (2009) Institutional structure and incentives of technology transfer. Journal of Technology Management in China, 4, 67–84. CrossRef Chesbrough, H. (2011) Bringing open innovation to services. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52, 85–91. Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 43 Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., and Salter, A. (2011) The comparative role of TTOs and individual level behaviour of academics to explain academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40, 1084–1093. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 33 Clausen, T. and Korneliussen, T. (2012) The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and speed to the market: the case of incubator firms in Norway. Technovation, 32, 560–567. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 10 Colapinto, C. and Porlezza, C. (2012) Innovation in creative industries: from the quadruple helix model to the systems theory. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3, 343–333. CrossRef Cooke, P. (2005) Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation exploring 'Globalisation 2' - a new model of industry organisation. Research Policy, 34, 1128–1149. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 96 Djokovic, D. and Souitaris, V. (2008) Spinouts from academic institutions: a literature review with suggestions for future research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 225–247. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 61 Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B., and Gruber, T. (2011) Expanding understanding of service exchange and value co-creation: a social construction approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 327–339. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 144 Etzkowitz, H. (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823–833. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 302 Etzkowitz, H. (2003) Research groups as 'quasi-firms': the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32, 109–121. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 269 Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and ‘mode 2’ to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 1052 Etzkowitz, H. and Klofsten, M. (2005) The innovating region: toward a theory of knowledge based regional development. R&D Management, 35, 243–255. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 98 Galbraith, B. and McAdam, R. (2011) The promise and problem with open innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 23, 1–6. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 14 Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage. Goldfard, B. and Henrekson, M. (2003) Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32, 639–658. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 142 Gredel, D., Kramer, M., and Bend, B. (2012) Patent-based investment funds as innovation intermediaries for SMEs: in-depth analysis of reciprocal interactions, motives and fallacies. Technovation, 32, 536–549. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 9 Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D.S., and Wright, M. (2011) 30 Years after Bayh-dole: reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40, 1045–1057. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 73 Guerrero, M. and Urbano, D. (2010) The development of an entrepreneurial university. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37, 43–74. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 27 Gunasekara, C. (2006) Reframing the role of universities in the development of regional innovation systems. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 101–113. CrossRef Hayter, C.S. (2013) Conceptualizing knowledge-based entrepreneurship networks: perspectives from the literature. Small Business Economics, 41, 899–911. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 8 Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2012) Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK Universities. Research Policy, 41, 262–275. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 28 Hidalgo, A. and Albors, J. (2008) Innovation management techniques and tools: a review from theory and practice. R&D Management, 38, 113–127. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 46 Hindle, K. and Yencken, J. (2004) Public research commercialisation, entrepreneurship and new technology based firms: an integrated Model. Technovation, 24, 793–803. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 54 HM Treasury (2003) Lambert review of business-industry collaboration. Available online: http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/media/9/0/lambert_review_final_450.pdf (accessed 24/03/2011). Howells, J., Ramlogan, R., and Cheng, S.L. (2012) Innovation and university collaboration: paradox and complexity within the knowledge economy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36, 703–721. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 18 Hughes, A. and Kitson, M. (2012) Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: new evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36, 723–750. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 19 Huyghe, A., Knockaert, M., Wright, M., and Piva, E. (2014) Technology transfer offices as boundary spanners in the pre-spin-off process: the case of a hybrid model. Small Business Economics, 43, 289–307. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 2 Ivanova, I. (2014) Quadruple helix systems and symmetry: a step towards helix innovation system Classification. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5, 357–369. CrossRef Johnston, L., Robinson, S., and Lockett, N. (2010) Recognising ‘open innovation’ in HEI-industry interaction for knowledge transfer and exchange. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 16, 540–560. CrossRef Kenney, M. and Mowery, D. (2014) Public Universities and Regional Development: Insights from the University of California System. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Klofsten, M., Heydebreck, P., and Jones-Evans, D. (2010) Transferring good practice beyond organizational borders: lessons from transferring an entrepreneurship programme. Regional Studies, 44, 791–799. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 8 Kotha, R., George, G., and Srikanth, K. (2012) Bridging the mutual knowledge gap: coordination and the commercialisation of university science. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 498–524. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 7 Larsen, M.T. (2011) The implications of academic enterprise for public science: an overview of the empirical evidence. Research Policy, 40, 6–19. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 24 Lee, P. (2012) Transcending the tacit dimension: patents, relationships, and organizational integration in technology Transfer. California Law Review, 100, 1035–1057. Leydesdorff, L. (2011) The triple helix, quadruple helix, and an N-tuple of helices: explanatory models for analyzing the Knowledge-based economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3, 25–35. CrossRef Li, Y., Yi, L., Yi, D., and Li, M. (2008) Entrepreneurial orientation, strategic flexibilities and indigenous firm innovation in transitional China. International Journal of Technology Management, 41, 223–246. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 19 Link, A.N. and Siegel, D.S. (2005) Generating science-based growth: an econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university–industry technology transfer. The European Journal of Finance, 11, 169–181. CrossRef Lipinski, J., Lester, D.L., and Nicholls, J. (2013) Promoting social entrepreneurship: harnessing experiential learning with technology transfer to create knowledge based opportunities. Journal of Applied Business Research, 29, 597–606. CrossRef Lu, L. and Etzkowitz, H. (2008) Strategic challenges for creating knowledge-based innovation in china: transforming triple helix university-government-industry relations. Journal of Technology Management in China, 3, 5–11. CrossRef MacGregor, S.P., Marques-Gou, P., and Simon-Villar, A. (2010) Gauging readiness for the quadruple helix: a study of 16 european organisations. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1, 173–190. CrossRef Markman, G.D., Siegel, D.S., and Wright, M. (2008) Research and technology Commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1401–1423. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 61 McAdam, R., Miller, K., McAdam, M., and Teague, S. (2012) The development of university technology transfer stakeholder relationships at a regional level: lessons for the future. Technovation, 32, 57–67. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 14 Miles, M.B. and Huberman, M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage. Miller, K., McAdam, M., and McAdam, R. (2014) The university business model: evolution and emergence from a stakeholder Perspective. R&D Management, 44, 265–287. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 4 Mitev, N. and Venters, W. (2009) Reflexive evaluation of an academic-industry research collaboration: can mode 2 management research be achieved? The Journal of Management Studies, 46, 733–749. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 19 O'Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Chevalier, A., and Roche, F. (2005) Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34, 994–1009. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 196 O'Shea, R.P., Chugh, H., and Allen, T.J. (2008) Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. International Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 653–666. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 68 Payumo, J., Gang, Z., Pulumbarit, E., Jones, K., Maredia, K., and Grimes, H. (2012) Managing intellectual property and technology commercialization: comparison and analysis of practices, success stories and lessons learned from public research universities in developing Asia. Innovation Management, Policy and Practice, 14, 478–494. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Perkmann, M. and Walsh, K. (2007) University–industry relationships and open innovation: towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9, 259–280. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 199 Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Brostrom, A., D'este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., Krabel, S., Kitson, M., Llerena, P., Lissoni, F., Salter, A., and Sobrero, M. (2013) Academic engagement and commercialisation: a review of the literature on university industry relations. Research Policy, 42, 423–442. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 92 Pittaway, L. and Cope, J. (2007) Entrepreneurship education: a systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 25, 479–510. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 87 Plewa, C., Rampersad, G., Johnson, C.R., Baaken, T., MacPherson, G., and Korff, N. (2013) The evolution of university-industry linkages–a framework. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 30, 21–44. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 8 Prajapati, V., Tripathy, S., and Dureja, H. (2013) Product lifecycle management through patents and regulatory strategies. Journal of Medical Marketing, 13, 171–180. CrossRef Rademakers, M. (2005) Corporate universities, driving force of knowledge innovation. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 17, 130–136. CrossRef RIS (2014) National/Regional Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation. Cohesion Policy 2014-2020, European Commission. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/smart_specialisation_en.pdf (accessed 10/12/2014). Rothaermel, F.T., Agung, S.D., and Jiang, L. (2007) University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 691–791. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 291 Roxas, S.A., Piroli, G., and Sorrentino, M. (2011) Efficiency and evaluation analysis of a network of technology transfer brokers. Technology Analysis and strategic Management, 23, 7–24. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 8 Schoonmaker, M.G. and Carayannis, E.G. (2013) Mode 3: a poposed classification scheme for the knowledge economy and society. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 56–577. CrossRef Schuurman, D., Lievens, B.D., Marez, L., and Ballon, P. (2012) Innovation from User Experience in Living Labs: Revisiting the 'Innovation Factory'-Concept with a Panel-Based and User-Centered Approach. Manchester: The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM). pp. 1–11. Scott, S. (2002) Selling university technology: patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48, 122–137. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 135 Seppo, M., Roigas, K., and Varblane, U. (2014) Governmental support measures for University-industry cooperation – comparative view in Europe. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5, 388–408. CrossRef Sharma, M., Kumar, U., and Lalande, L. (2006) Role of university technology transfer offices in university technology commercialisation: Case study of the Carleton University Foundry Program. Journal of Services Research, 6, 109–124. Web of Science{\circledR} Siegel, D.S., Waldman, D.D., Atwater, L.E., and Link, A.N. (2004) Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21, 115–142. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 159 Siegel, D.S., Veugelers, R., and Wright, M. (2007) Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy Implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23, 640–660. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 100 Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2015) Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink? British Journal of Management, 26, 582–595. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 4 Starkey, K. and Madden, P. (2001) Bridging the relevance gap: aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of Management, 12, 3–26. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 137 Stokes, D.D. (1997) PasteuŕS Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington: The Brookings Institution. Swan, J., Bresnen, M., Robertson, M., Newell, S., and Dopson, S. (2010) When policy meets practice: colliding logics and the challenges of 'Mode 2' initiatives in the translation of academic knowledge. Organization Studies, 31, 1311. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 21 Tello, S., Latham, S., and Kijewski, V. (2011) Assessing differences between technology transfer officers and institutions in the decision to commercialise new technologies. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 10, 93–111. CrossRef Thorpe, R., Holt, R., MacPherson, A., and Pittaway, L. (2005) Using knowledge within small and medium-sized firms: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7, 257–281. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 111 T{\"o}dtling, F. and Trippl, M. (2005) One size fits all? towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34, 1023–1209. Tranfield, D. and Starkey, K. (1998) The nature, social organisation and promotion of management research: towards policy. British Journal of Management, 9, 341–353. Wiley Online Library Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., and Smart, P. (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207–222. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 494 Urbano, D. and Guerrero, M. (2013) Entrepreneurial universities: socioeconomic impacts of academic entrepreneurship in a European context. Economic Development Quarterly, 27, 40–55. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 8 Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., and Debackere, K. (2011) Entrepreneurial effectiveness of european universities: an empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40, 553–564. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 40 Wilson, T. (2012) A Review of Business–Industry Collaboration. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32383/12-610-wilson-review-business-university-collaboration.pdf (accessed 18/12/2014). Wright, M. (2014) Academic entrepreneurship, technology transfer and society: where next? Journal of Technology Transfer, 39, 322–334. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 7 Wright, M., Piva, E., Mosey, S., and Lockett, A. (2009) Academic entrepreneurship and business schools. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 560–587. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 19 Zahra, S.A. and Wright, M. (2011) Entrepreneurship's next act. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25, 67–83. CrossRef | Web of Science{\circledR} Times Cited: 79 Zahra, S.A., Wright, M., and Abdelgawad, G. (2014) Contextualisation and advancement of entrepreneurship Research. International Small Business Journal, 32, 479–500.",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "25",
doi = "10.1111/radm.12228",
language = "English",
volume = "0",
journal = "R&D Management",
issn = "0033-6807",

}

A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda. / Miller, Kristel; McAdam, Rodney; McAdam, Maura.

In: R&D Management, Vol. 0, 25.07.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda

AU - Miller, Kristel

AU - McAdam, Rodney

AU - McAdam, Maura

N1 - Reference text: Abreu, M. and Grinevich, V. (2013) The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities. Research Policy, 42, 408–422. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 19 Abreu, M., Grinevich, V., Hughes, A., and Kitson, M. (2009) Knowledge Exchange between Academics and the Business, Public and Third Sectors, Centre for Business Research. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. Almirall, E. and Wareham, J. (2011) Living labs: arbiters of mid- and ground-level innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 23, 87–102. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 13 Al-Mubaraki, A., Mubarak, H., and Busier, M. (2013) Business incubation as an economic development strategy: a literature Review. International Journal of Management, 30, 362–367. Ambos, T.C., Makela, K., Birkinshaw, J., and D'este, P. (2008) When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1424–1447. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 64 Arnkil, R., Järvensivu, A., Koski, P., and Piirainen, T. (2010) Exploring Quadruple Helix – Outlining user-Oriented Innovation Models. Finland: University of Tampere, Institute for Social Research, Work Research Centre. Asheim, B.T. and Coenen, L. (2005) Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing nordic clusters. Research Policy, 34, 1173–1190. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 304 Barca, F., McCann, P., and Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2012) The case for regional development intervention: place-based versus place-neutral approaches. Journal of Regional Science, 52, 134–152. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 101 Becheikh, N., Landry, R., and Amara, N. (2006) Lessons from innovation empirical studies in the manufacturing sector: a systematic review of the literature from 1993-2003. Technovation, 26, 644–664. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 137 Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M.P. (2006) Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: a conceptual framework for understanding Knowledge-based economic Development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 175–188. CrossRef Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M. (2008) Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19, 69–89. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 177 Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., and Burton, R. (2001) Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: an exploratory study of duke, johns hopkins, and pennsylvania state universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 21–35. CrossRef Bozeman, B. (2000) Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29, 627–655. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 332 Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., and Youtie, J. (2015) The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: revisiting the contingent effectiveness model. Research Policy, 44, 34–49. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 3 Camagni, R. and Capello, R. (2013) Regional innovation patterns and the EU regional policy reform: toward smart innovation policies. Growth and Change, 44, 355–389. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 25 Campbell, E.G., Powers, J.B., Blumenthal, D., and Biles, B. (2004) Inside the triple helix: technology transfer and commercialization in the life Sciences. Health Affairs, 23, 64–76. CrossRef | PubMed | Web of Science® Times Cited: 20 Carayannis, E.G. and Campbell, D.F.J. (2009) “Mode 3” and “quadruple helix”: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46, 201–234. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 67 Carayannis, E.G. and Campbell, D.F.G. (2014) Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: arts, democracy, and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 3, 12–24. CrossRef Carayannis, E.G. and Rakhmatullin, R. (2014) The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in europe and Beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5, 212–239. CrossRef Carayannis, E.G., Barth, R.D., and Campbell, D.F.J. (2012) The quinuple helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1, 1–12. CrossRef Chesbrough, H. (2007) Why companies should have open business models. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48, 22–28. Web of Science® Times Cited: 114 Cao, Y., Zhao, L., and Chen, R. (2009) Institutional structure and incentives of technology transfer. Journal of Technology Management in China, 4, 67–84. CrossRef Chesbrough, H. (2011) Bringing open innovation to services. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52, 85–91. Web of Science® Times Cited: 43 Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., and Salter, A. (2011) The comparative role of TTOs and individual level behaviour of academics to explain academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40, 1084–1093. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 33 Clausen, T. and Korneliussen, T. (2012) The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and speed to the market: the case of incubator firms in Norway. Technovation, 32, 560–567. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 10 Colapinto, C. and Porlezza, C. (2012) Innovation in creative industries: from the quadruple helix model to the systems theory. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3, 343–333. CrossRef Cooke, P. (2005) Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation exploring 'Globalisation 2' - a new model of industry organisation. Research Policy, 34, 1128–1149. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 96 Djokovic, D. and Souitaris, V. (2008) Spinouts from academic institutions: a literature review with suggestions for future research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 225–247. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 61 Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B., and Gruber, T. (2011) Expanding understanding of service exchange and value co-creation: a social construction approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 327–339. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 144 Etzkowitz, H. (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823–833. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 302 Etzkowitz, H. (2003) Research groups as 'quasi-firms': the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32, 109–121. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 269 Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and ‘mode 2’ to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 1052 Etzkowitz, H. and Klofsten, M. (2005) The innovating region: toward a theory of knowledge based regional development. R&D Management, 35, 243–255. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 98 Galbraith, B. and McAdam, R. (2011) The promise and problem with open innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 23, 1–6. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 14 Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage. Goldfard, B. and Henrekson, M. (2003) Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32, 639–658. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 142 Gredel, D., Kramer, M., and Bend, B. (2012) Patent-based investment funds as innovation intermediaries for SMEs: in-depth analysis of reciprocal interactions, motives and fallacies. Technovation, 32, 536–549. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 9 Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D.S., and Wright, M. (2011) 30 Years after Bayh-dole: reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40, 1045–1057. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 73 Guerrero, M. and Urbano, D. (2010) The development of an entrepreneurial university. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37, 43–74. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 27 Gunasekara, C. (2006) Reframing the role of universities in the development of regional innovation systems. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 101–113. CrossRef Hayter, C.S. (2013) Conceptualizing knowledge-based entrepreneurship networks: perspectives from the literature. Small Business Economics, 41, 899–911. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 8 Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2012) Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK Universities. Research Policy, 41, 262–275. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 28 Hidalgo, A. and Albors, J. (2008) Innovation management techniques and tools: a review from theory and practice. R&D Management, 38, 113–127. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 46 Hindle, K. and Yencken, J. (2004) Public research commercialisation, entrepreneurship and new technology based firms: an integrated Model. Technovation, 24, 793–803. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 54 HM Treasury (2003) Lambert review of business-industry collaboration. Available online: http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/media/9/0/lambert_review_final_450.pdf (accessed 24/03/2011). Howells, J., Ramlogan, R., and Cheng, S.L. (2012) Innovation and university collaboration: paradox and complexity within the knowledge economy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36, 703–721. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 18 Hughes, A. and Kitson, M. (2012) Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: new evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36, 723–750. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 19 Huyghe, A., Knockaert, M., Wright, M., and Piva, E. (2014) Technology transfer offices as boundary spanners in the pre-spin-off process: the case of a hybrid model. Small Business Economics, 43, 289–307. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 2 Ivanova, I. (2014) Quadruple helix systems and symmetry: a step towards helix innovation system Classification. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5, 357–369. CrossRef Johnston, L., Robinson, S., and Lockett, N. (2010) Recognising ‘open innovation’ in HEI-industry interaction for knowledge transfer and exchange. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 16, 540–560. CrossRef Kenney, M. and Mowery, D. (2014) Public Universities and Regional Development: Insights from the University of California System. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Klofsten, M., Heydebreck, P., and Jones-Evans, D. (2010) Transferring good practice beyond organizational borders: lessons from transferring an entrepreneurship programme. Regional Studies, 44, 791–799. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 8 Kotha, R., George, G., and Srikanth, K. (2012) Bridging the mutual knowledge gap: coordination and the commercialisation of university science. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 498–524. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 7 Larsen, M.T. (2011) The implications of academic enterprise for public science: an overview of the empirical evidence. Research Policy, 40, 6–19. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 24 Lee, P. (2012) Transcending the tacit dimension: patents, relationships, and organizational integration in technology Transfer. California Law Review, 100, 1035–1057. Leydesdorff, L. (2011) The triple helix, quadruple helix, and an N-tuple of helices: explanatory models for analyzing the Knowledge-based economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3, 25–35. CrossRef Li, Y., Yi, L., Yi, D., and Li, M. (2008) Entrepreneurial orientation, strategic flexibilities and indigenous firm innovation in transitional China. International Journal of Technology Management, 41, 223–246. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 19 Link, A.N. and Siegel, D.S. (2005) Generating science-based growth: an econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university–industry technology transfer. The European Journal of Finance, 11, 169–181. CrossRef Lipinski, J., Lester, D.L., and Nicholls, J. (2013) Promoting social entrepreneurship: harnessing experiential learning with technology transfer to create knowledge based opportunities. Journal of Applied Business Research, 29, 597–606. CrossRef Lu, L. and Etzkowitz, H. (2008) Strategic challenges for creating knowledge-based innovation in china: transforming triple helix university-government-industry relations. Journal of Technology Management in China, 3, 5–11. CrossRef MacGregor, S.P., Marques-Gou, P., and Simon-Villar, A. (2010) Gauging readiness for the quadruple helix: a study of 16 european organisations. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1, 173–190. CrossRef Markman, G.D., Siegel, D.S., and Wright, M. (2008) Research and technology Commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1401–1423. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 61 McAdam, R., Miller, K., McAdam, M., and Teague, S. (2012) The development of university technology transfer stakeholder relationships at a regional level: lessons for the future. Technovation, 32, 57–67. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 14 Miles, M.B. and Huberman, M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage. Miller, K., McAdam, M., and McAdam, R. (2014) The university business model: evolution and emergence from a stakeholder Perspective. R&D Management, 44, 265–287. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 4 Mitev, N. and Venters, W. (2009) Reflexive evaluation of an academic-industry research collaboration: can mode 2 management research be achieved? The Journal of Management Studies, 46, 733–749. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 19 O'Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Chevalier, A., and Roche, F. (2005) Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34, 994–1009. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 196 O'Shea, R.P., Chugh, H., and Allen, T.J. (2008) Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. International Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 653–666. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 68 Payumo, J., Gang, Z., Pulumbarit, E., Jones, K., Maredia, K., and Grimes, H. (2012) Managing intellectual property and technology commercialization: comparison and analysis of practices, success stories and lessons learned from public research universities in developing Asia. Innovation Management, Policy and Practice, 14, 478–494. CrossRef | Web of Science® Perkmann, M. and Walsh, K. (2007) University–industry relationships and open innovation: towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9, 259–280. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 199 Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Brostrom, A., D'este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., Krabel, S., Kitson, M., Llerena, P., Lissoni, F., Salter, A., and Sobrero, M. (2013) Academic engagement and commercialisation: a review of the literature on university industry relations. Research Policy, 42, 423–442. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 92 Pittaway, L. and Cope, J. (2007) Entrepreneurship education: a systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 25, 479–510. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 87 Plewa, C., Rampersad, G., Johnson, C.R., Baaken, T., MacPherson, G., and Korff, N. (2013) The evolution of university-industry linkages–a framework. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 30, 21–44. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 8 Prajapati, V., Tripathy, S., and Dureja, H. (2013) Product lifecycle management through patents and regulatory strategies. Journal of Medical Marketing, 13, 171–180. CrossRef Rademakers, M. (2005) Corporate universities, driving force of knowledge innovation. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 17, 130–136. CrossRef RIS (2014) National/Regional Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation. Cohesion Policy 2014-2020, European Commission. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/smart_specialisation_en.pdf (accessed 10/12/2014). Rothaermel, F.T., Agung, S.D., and Jiang, L. (2007) University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 691–791. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 291 Roxas, S.A., Piroli, G., and Sorrentino, M. (2011) Efficiency and evaluation analysis of a network of technology transfer brokers. Technology Analysis and strategic Management, 23, 7–24. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 8 Schoonmaker, M.G. and Carayannis, E.G. (2013) Mode 3: a poposed classification scheme for the knowledge economy and society. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 56–577. CrossRef Schuurman, D., Lievens, B.D., Marez, L., and Ballon, P. (2012) Innovation from User Experience in Living Labs: Revisiting the 'Innovation Factory'-Concept with a Panel-Based and User-Centered Approach. Manchester: The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM). pp. 1–11. Scott, S. (2002) Selling university technology: patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48, 122–137. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 135 Seppo, M., Roigas, K., and Varblane, U. (2014) Governmental support measures for University-industry cooperation – comparative view in Europe. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5, 388–408. CrossRef Sharma, M., Kumar, U., and Lalande, L. (2006) Role of university technology transfer offices in university technology commercialisation: Case study of the Carleton University Foundry Program. Journal of Services Research, 6, 109–124. Web of Science® Siegel, D.S., Waldman, D.D., Atwater, L.E., and Link, A.N. (2004) Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21, 115–142. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 159 Siegel, D.S., Veugelers, R., and Wright, M. (2007) Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy Implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23, 640–660. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 100 Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2015) Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink? British Journal of Management, 26, 582–595. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 4 Starkey, K. and Madden, P. (2001) Bridging the relevance gap: aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of Management, 12, 3–26. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 137 Stokes, D.D. (1997) PasteuŕS Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington: The Brookings Institution. Swan, J., Bresnen, M., Robertson, M., Newell, S., and Dopson, S. (2010) When policy meets practice: colliding logics and the challenges of 'Mode 2' initiatives in the translation of academic knowledge. Organization Studies, 31, 1311. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 21 Tello, S., Latham, S., and Kijewski, V. (2011) Assessing differences between technology transfer officers and institutions in the decision to commercialise new technologies. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 10, 93–111. CrossRef Thorpe, R., Holt, R., MacPherson, A., and Pittaway, L. (2005) Using knowledge within small and medium-sized firms: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7, 257–281. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 111 Tödtling, F. and Trippl, M. (2005) One size fits all? towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34, 1023–1209. Tranfield, D. and Starkey, K. (1998) The nature, social organisation and promotion of management research: towards policy. British Journal of Management, 9, 341–353. Wiley Online Library Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., and Smart, P. (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207–222. Wiley Online Library | Web of Science® Times Cited: 494 Urbano, D. and Guerrero, M. (2013) Entrepreneurial universities: socioeconomic impacts of academic entrepreneurship in a European context. Economic Development Quarterly, 27, 40–55. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 8 Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., and Debackere, K. (2011) Entrepreneurial effectiveness of european universities: an empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40, 553–564. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 40 Wilson, T. (2012) A Review of Business–Industry Collaboration. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32383/12-610-wilson-review-business-university-collaboration.pdf (accessed 18/12/2014). Wright, M. (2014) Academic entrepreneurship, technology transfer and society: where next? Journal of Technology Transfer, 39, 322–334. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 7 Wright, M., Piva, E., Mosey, S., and Lockett, A. (2009) Academic entrepreneurship and business schools. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 560–587. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 19 Zahra, S.A. and Wright, M. (2011) Entrepreneurship's next act. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25, 67–83. CrossRef | Web of Science® Times Cited: 79 Zahra, S.A., Wright, M., and Abdelgawad, G. (2014) Contextualisation and advancement of entrepreneurship Research. International Small Business Journal, 32, 479–500.

PY - 2016/7/25

Y1 - 2016/7/25

N2 - Within recent years, there has been a rapid expansion of the University's role in economic development. This has resulted in University Technology Transfer (UTT) taking place within an increasingly complex network of regional stakeholders. This complexity has resulted in quadruple helix models where the triple helix model of academia, industry and regional government now includes societal based innovation users as a fourth helix. Despite this development, extant research is fragmented and lacks coherent frameworks and conceptualisations which fully depict the dynamic and evolving nature of UTT. Accordingly, this article reviews Mode 2 UTT from a quadruple helix perspective to identify key themes to develop a research agenda which reflects progression from a triple into a quadruple helix ecosystem.

AB - Within recent years, there has been a rapid expansion of the University's role in economic development. This has resulted in University Technology Transfer (UTT) taking place within an increasingly complex network of regional stakeholders. This complexity has resulted in quadruple helix models where the triple helix model of academia, industry and regional government now includes societal based innovation users as a fourth helix. Despite this development, extant research is fragmented and lacks coherent frameworks and conceptualisations which fully depict the dynamic and evolving nature of UTT. Accordingly, this article reviews Mode 2 UTT from a quadruple helix perspective to identify key themes to develop a research agenda which reflects progression from a triple into a quadruple helix ecosystem.

KW - systematic literature review

KW - university technology transfer

U2 - 10.1111/radm.12228

DO - 10.1111/radm.12228

M3 - Article

VL - 0

JO - R&D Management

T2 - R&D Management

JF - R&D Management

SN - 0033-6807

ER -