Search results

There are three obvious lessons to be learned from the Texaco saga now unfolding on the American stage. First, there is a wide gulf between the official policies of an organization and how its people behave in the trenches and executive offices. Second, diversity in its U.S. context is the unfortunate prisoner of EEO definitions at a time when such language no longer fits the reality of global economics. Third, best‐practice management is gaining ground and damage‐control exercises are fast becoming a high art form. Not so obvious is a prescription for what the private sector can do in the next five years to leverage human equity.

We review and synthesize the burgeoning literature on institutions and agents engaged in the commercialization of university-based intellectual property. These studies indicate that institutional incentives and organizational practices play an important role in enhancing the effectiveness of technology transfer. We conclude that university technology transfer should be considered from a strategic perspective. Institutions that choose to stress the entrepreneurial dimension of technology transfer need to address skill deficiencies in technology transfer offices, reward systems that are inconsistent with enhanced entrepreneurial activity, and education/training for faculty members, post-docs, and graduate students relating to interactions with entrepreneurs. Business schools at these universities can play a major role in addressing these skill and educational deficiencies through the delivery of targeted programs to technology licensing officers and members of the campus community wishing to launch startup firms.