Incentives in Technology Transfer
A guide on how to encourage, recognize and reward researchers and professionals.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bd9a3/bd9a35ab274c7aacbd3be6af6ad3321e8d89f8c5" alt=""
Introduction
Universities and public institutions are often at the forefront of research and innovation. However, the results of this research frequently remain unimplemented, lacking commercialization opportunities and thus never bringing their economic and social benefits to the world. Technology transfer is used to bridge this gap and turn ideas born in the research lab into practical solutions to our daily challenges.
This new guide features recommendations and best practices on how to incentivize academic researchers and technology transfer professionals to actively participate in technology transfer activities, leading to research commercialization.
This Guide is a rare combination of deep analysis of complex issues in technology transfer and very practical tips and tools. I highly recommend it to any leader or practitioner in tech transfer, as well as policy makers and university leadership.
Challenges of Technology Transfer Incentives Programs
Incentive programs for technology transfer encounter several critical challenges.
First, it is important to find the right combination of incentives and their timing. Some benefits may be too far away in time, for example, an innovation award or royalty shares received 5 or 10 years after the invention disclosure. In this case, it is important to put in place different short-term based incentives at different stages of the TT process.
Furthermore, incentives, while motivating, can unintentionally steer faculty toward applied research, potentially undermining other knowledge creation activities and promoting short-term gains over long-term benefits. The report delves into these challenges and more, offering a comprehensive exploration of incentive complexities in technology transfer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/27e43/27e436dc42f27ba17f9484b5faa2ff3ae640c77d" alt=""
Motivations and Barriers to Technology Transfer
Motivations of researchers and technology transfer professionals (TTPs) not only significantly impact their actions, level of satisfaction, and dedication to their work, but also determine the degree to which incentives can influence their behavior. These motivations can be classified into internal, external, and contextual factors.
Based on empirical studies, the Guide proposes standardized questionnaire template that universities and research institutions can distribute to researchers and TTPs, to gain a comprehensive understanding of their motivations and potential barriers to their work satisfaction.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/484d0/484d0af860e4dd333c13f3d92aebdbd07c87b195" alt=""
Non-financial Incentives for technology transfer
When it comes to promoting participation in technology transfer and fostering academic engagement, non-financial incentives have proven to be highly effective. They serve the dual purpose of cultivating a more entrepreneurial culture within universities and providing support for individual programs and policies.
The most prevalent non-financial motivators for researchers include:
- recognition,
- flexible employment conditions,
- entrepreneurship support,
- provision of additional research funds,
- right to publish,
- returning IP.
Furthermore, strategies to attract fresh TTPs and retain existing staff may involve initiatives such as:
- peer recognition,
- increased flexibility for remote work,
- training opportunities and innovative approaches to offering higher salaries or fringe benefits.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a8869/a88695011f583920d0aced191c69b05fe93d742a" alt=""
Examples of Non-financial Incentives
University of Cape Town (UCT), South Africa
Cape Town (UCT)’s Technology Transfer Office (TTO), Research Contracts and Innovation (RC&I), celebrates innovation at the UCT in person with the annual Inventors’ Breakfast. The breakfast also serves as the launch event for the annual “Innovation at UCT” publication, which profiles inventions, UCT inventors, spin-off companies and the activities of RC&I.
New inventors are also presented with RC&I’s iconic “Inventor” coffee mugs, while those who had a South African patent granted in the past year receive their patent certificates.
Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) Innovation, Japan
OIST has cultivated a comprehensive ecosystem, complete with networking opportunities, a PoC program, entrepreneurial education, acceleration of external groups, incubation spaces and proactive support.
It is strategically designed to transition technologies from the research phase to the marketplace.
Oxford University Innovation, United Kingdom
Oxford University Innovation (TTO) has introduced a wide range of incentives for its staff. These include on-the-job training, mentoring and coaching, as well as external training programs and conferences.
Further to this, it also includes a Staff Award Scheme designed to acknowledge and incentivize employees who consistently contribute to the organization's performance throughout the year.
Additionally, the institution operates a peer nomination scheme, which allows all employees to nominate colleagues or teams that have gone above and beyond, with recognition awards.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/52665/526659fc069b0c09aedfa093f2a00085e94a4b34" alt=""
TTPs and Researchers’ Career Advancement Incentives
To cater for the need for more nuanced promotions criteria, a rising number of research institutions start to expand the criteria for faculty promotion and/or tenure to include patenting, spinouts and other aspects of commercialization.
In the context of TTPs, numerous universities are adopting feedback surveys to appraise not only the outcomes or 'what' they have achieved but also the way TTPs carry out their responsibilities, the 'how' aspect. This may involve endorsements from collaborating researchers and input from industry partners.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b506b/b506b2364f1a2260f004cd67edbcecdc63b2fff8" alt=""
Examples of Evaluation Criteria
University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
The emphasis on the "how" dimension of TTO services is particularly vital at Cambridge University, given its unique provision that allows academics to opt out.
Consequently, TTPs at Cambridge Enterprise (TTO of the University of Cambridge) must deliver exceptional services to encourage researchers to engage with the TTO voluntarily.
To gauge the performance, Cambridge Enterprise conducted a survey within the academic community, reaching out to all 5,000 researchers.
Remarkably, 27% of them responded, a notably high response rate for anyone familiar with survey practices. Among the respondents, 68% expressed awareness of TTO’s activities, 27% had collaborated with TTO, and most importantly, within that 27%, a striking 92% indicated they would recommend TTO’s services to their peers or colleagues.
National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico
In the promotion assessment criteria of UNAM, key factors to be taken into account encompass finalized technological advancements, prototypes, patents, standards, experimental equipment, and specialized software.
Additional components involve the support and administration of research project funding, technology transfer agreements, academic collaboration initiatives, and research and development projects aimed at benefitting either the industry or the public sector.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VPI) or Virginia Tech, USA
At Virginia Tech, faculty seeking tenure and promotion can highlight economic contributions and entrepreneurship, which include launching start-ups, securing competitive grants like SBIR awards, and other notable business achievements.
Additionally, they may emphasize intellectual properties such as software, patents, and disclosures before patents are granted. These explicit criteria reflect the university's recognition of diverse contributions beyond traditional academia.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b7b9c/b7b9c07eb8fc548d292a667f07179cc755f819f0" alt=""
Financial Incentives for technology transfer
Most TTOs hesitate to provide financial incentives to staff due to budget constraints, concerns about impropriety, or potential conflicts of interest. However, those TTOs that do so, report improved recruitment, performance, and budget management. The most common financial incentives for researchers are revenue sharing and spinout equity.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/49721/497218a7bd2d2940be65b7162d7c42fc9c6957ab" alt=""
Examples of Evaluation Criteria
Stellenbosch University (SU), South Africa
The SU TTO, Innovus, allows researchers to benefit from both equity and revenue sharing.
The SU Spinout Information Guide indicates that rewards are for different roles and that “participants in spinout companies are generally compensated for their contributions in one or more ways:
1. If a patent generates royalty income, a portion of the income goes to the researchers who made the invention for their role as inventors.
2. If a spinout company is established, the founders receive equity and any dividend payments and other income associated with their shareholding serve as reward for their role as entrepreneurs.
3. The employees of the spinout company receive salaries and sometimes bonus payments to reward them for their role in managing the company.
4. A fourth possible reward may be paid to researchers who consult to a spinout company as reward for contributing to the success of the company through transferring their knowledge.
Qatar University (QU), Qatar
Qatar University (QU) encourages faculty members to engage with industry, business, government, and other societal institutions to enrich their professional interactions.
Therefore, QU’ Faculty Consultancy Policy allows faculty members on a full-time appointment to engage in consultancy for maximum one working day per week, and to retain the monetary reward.
University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), USA
UCSF offers a researcher's share in licensing revenues for faculty members involved in technology transfer activities.
When a technology developed by UCSF researchers is successfully licensed or leads to a commercial product, the inventors receive a portion of the revenue generated from the commercialization process. This financial incentive encourages researchers to actively engage in technology transfer efforts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0f25a/0f25a6fdc9ce5308ec7adcbb3beaee00dce7b9e2" alt=""
Conclusions and Key Messages
The key takeaways from our exploration include the importance of fostering collaboration over competition, adapting incentives to different contexts, recognizing the absence of a one-size-fits-all solution, striking a balance in incentive structures, cultivating a positive atmosphere beyond incentives, the necessity of government support, and the ongoing exchange of experiences and ideas as a means to continuously refine and optimize incentive programs.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/84af9/84af932147d03119e58e347554ecc95326d7fd93" alt=""
Contribute to Future Editions
We invite you to contribute to the future editions of this guide and share your success stories and lessons. Your input will play a key role in making academic research and technology transfer have a bigger impact on the world. To share your stories, fill out the questionnaire.