Estrategias competitivas de conocimiento y comercialización de la innovación: un dofa unificado y un enfoque de proceso de análisis jerárquico difuso (fuzzy ahp)
Main Article Content
Keywords
Conocimiento, innovación, comercialización, estrategia, enfoque AHP, matriz DOFA.
Resumen
Las universidades han mostrado un fuerte deseo de comercializar investigaciones e innovación. Como resultado de esto, cada vez más buscan depender menos de los presupuestos públicos. La comercialización se ha convertido en la entrada a la privatización, sin embargo, la selección incorrecta de las estrategias de comercialización con frecuencia resulta en la eliminación de recursos y tiempo. La correcta evaluación y ranking de estrategias para los mejores recursos es esencial para el desempeño competitivo de una universidad. El híbrido entre el DOFA y el modelo proceso de análisis jerárquico difuso (Fuzzy AHP) adoptado en este estudio, provee una categorización clara de las estrategias de estas universidades. Los criterios principales y relevantes, al igual que los subcriterios, son identificados utilizando el análisis DOFA. La herramienta Fuzzy AHP se utiliza luego para evaluar y valorar los factores internos y externos que afectan la competencia en las universidades de Irán. Teniendo como base la matriz IE, el crecimiento y el proceso de construcción de las estrategias son prioridades cuando se tiene en cuenta la comercialización. Los resultados de este estudio revelan que los emprendimientos académicos, la tecnología conjunta, los laboratorios de investigación conjunta, las alianzas estratégicas, los expertos en reclutamiento y las contrataciones con la industria son las mejores estrategias para las universidades iraníes.
Descargas
Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.
Referencias
Arora, A., and Fosfuri, A. (2003). Licensing in the Presence of Competing Technologies. Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization, 52, 277–95.
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). (2003). AUTM Licensing Survey FY 2001., Association
of University Technology Managers.
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). (2010). Licensing Activity Survey FY2008. Association
of University Technology Managers.
Ayhan, M.B.(2015). A Fuzzy Ahp Approach For Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study In A Gearmotor
Company. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains (IJMVSC), 4(3). 11-23.
Bandarian, R. (2007). From Idea to Market in RIPI; An agile Frame for NTD Process. Journal of Technology
Management and Innovation, 2(1), JOTMI Research Group.
Bercovitz, J., and Feldmann, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: a conceptual
framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. The Journal of Technology
Transfer, 31, 175–188.
Bramwell, A., and Wolf, D. A., (2008). Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial
University of Waterloo. Research Policy, 37, 1175–1187.
Barnes, T., Pashby, I., and Gibbons, A. (2002). Effective University–Industry Interaction: A Multi-case
Evaluation of Collaborative R&D Projects. European Management Journal, 20, 272–285.
Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., and Burton, R. (2001). Organizational Structure as Determinants of
Academic Patent and Licensing Behavior: An Exploratory Study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania
State Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer 26, 21–35.
Brachos, D., Konstantinos, K., Soderquist, K.E., Prastacos, G. (2007). Knowledge Effectiveness, Social Context
and Innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11, 31-44.
Brooks, G., Heffner, A., & Henderson, D. (2014). A SWOT Analysis of Competitive Knowledge from Social
Media for A Small Start-Up Business. Review of Business Information Systems, 18(1), 23-34.
Boutkhoum, O., Hanine, M., Agouti, T., and Tikniouine, A. (2015). An improved hybrid multi-criteria/
multidimensional model for strategic industrial location selection: Casablanca industrial zones as a case
study. Springerplus. 4, 628.
Buckley, J. J., (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Systems, 17 (1), 233–247.
Castrogiovanni, G., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., Mas-Tur, A., and Roig-Tierno, N.(2016). Where to acquire knowledge:
Adapting knowledge management to financial institutions. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1812-1816
Chang, Y., Yang, P., and Chen, M. (2009). The determinants of academic research commercial performance:
Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6),936-946.
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., and Walsh, J.P. (2000). Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability
Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not). NBER Working Paper No. 7552.
Debackere, K. and Veugelers, R. (2005). The Role of Academic Technology Transfer Organizations in Improving
Industry Science Links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342.
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.
Feldman, M. P., Link, A. N., and Siegel, D. S. (2002). The economics of science and technology. Norwell, MA:
Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Friedman, J. and Silberman, J. (2003). University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and
Location Matter?. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 81–85.
Franklin, S., Wright, M., and Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and Surrogate Entrepreneurs in University Spin-out
Companies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 127–141.
Guzak, J. R., & Rasheed, A. A. (2014). Governance and growth of professional service firms. Service Industries
Journal, 34(4), 295-313.
Goktepe, D. (2004). Investigation of University Industry Technology Transfer Cases: A Conceptual and
Methodological Approach. Division of Innovation-LTH Lund University. Retrieved from www.infra.kth.se/
cesis/cesis/conference/Devrim%20Goktepe.pdf.
Gans, J. S., and Stern, S. (2003). The product market and the market for “ideas”: commercialization strategies
for technology entrepreneurs. Research Policy, 32, 333–350
Goldfarb, B. and Henrekson, M. (2003). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of
university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32, 639–658.
Gittelman, M. (2008). National institutions, public–private knowledge flows, and innovation performance: A
comparative study of the biotechnology industry in the US and France. Research Policy, 35(7), 1052-
1068.
Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Salamzadeh, A. (2014). Evolving Entrepreneurial Universities: Experiences and
challenges in the Middle Eastern context. in Fayolle, A. & Redford, D. T. (2014). Handbook of Research
in Entrepreneurship Education. Entrepreneurial University Handbook Volume 4 Cambridge: Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Salamzadeh, A. (2015). Entrepreneurial Transformation in the Middle East:
Experiences from Tehran Universities. Technics Technologies Education Management, 10(4), 533-537.
Götsén, A., Pettersson, B., (2016). Business Incubators - the savior of startups? - An exploratory study on
knowledge acquisition in a business incubator from a startup perspective. Master’s Thesis 30 credits
Department of Business Studies Uppsala University.
González-Pernía, J.L., Iñaki, G.K., & Peña-Legazkue. (2013). An Assessment of the Determinants of University
Technology Transfer. Economic Development Quarterly, 27(1), 6-17.
Gonzalez-Perez, M.A, Velez-Calle, A., Cathro, V., Caprar, D.V., & Taras, V.(2014). Virtual Teams and International
Business Teaching and Learning:The Case of the Global Enterprise Experience (GEE). Journal of Teaching
in International Business, 25(3), 200-213.
Gonzalez-Perez, M.A., and Leonard, L. (2013). Principles and strategies to balance ethical, social and
environmental concerns with corporate requirements. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Kasch, S., and Dowling, M. (2008). Commercialization strategies of young biotechnology firms: An empirical
analysis of the U.S. industry. Research Policy, 37, 1765–1777.
Knockaert, M., Vandenbroucke, E., Huyghe, A. (2012). Unraveling the need for innovation support services
in new technology-based firms: The impact of commercialization strategy. Science and public policy
(SPP), 40(1).
Kelley, D., Neck, H. M., O’Connor, G. C., & Paulson, A. (2005). Corporate entrepreneurship through radical
innovation: key organization and initiative level mechanisms. In Corporate entrepreneurship and
venturing (pp. 23-48). Springer US.
Khajeheian, D. (2013). “New Venture Creation in Social Media Platform; Towards a Framework for Media
Entrepreneurship”. In Handbook of Social Media Management (125-142). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Khajeheian, D (2016a), “Telecommunication Policy: Communication Act Update”. Global Media Journal-
Canadian Edition, 9(1) 135-141.
Khajeheian, D. (2016b). “Audience Commodification: A Source of Innovation in Business Models”. Technology
Innovation Management Review, 6(8), 40-47.
Landry, R., Amara, N., and Ouimet, M.(2007). Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from the
Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32,
561–592
Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., and Bozeman, B.(2007). An Empirical Analysis of the Propensity of Academics to
Engage in Informal University Technology Transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641-655.
Moray, N., & Clarysse, B. (2004). Institutional Change and the Resource Flows going to Spin off Projects: The
case of IMEC (No. 04/241). Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B., and Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The Growth of Patenting and Licensing
by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Efects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Research Policy, 30,
99–119.
MIT. (2015). An MIT Inventor’s Guide to Startups: for Faculty and Students. Technology Licensing Office.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (1999). Commercialization strategies In
Commercialization and Business Planning Guide for the Post-Award Period, Dawnbreaker Press, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 3, 37–46.
Ndonzuau, F. N., Pirnay, F., and Surlemont, B. (2002). A stage model of academic spin-off creation.
Technovation, 22, 281–289
Nilsson, A. S., Rickne, A., & Bengtsson, L. (2010). Transfer of academic research: uncovering the grey
zone. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 617-636.
OECD. (2002). Benchmarking Industry–Science Relationships. Paris: OECD.
Plewa, C. (2005). Differences in perceived benefits from university-industry relationships. In ANZMAC2005
Conference: Business Interaction, Relationships an Networks, University of Adelaide, South Australia.
Rutherford, M.W., & Holt D.T.(2007). Corporate entrepreneurship: An empirical look at the innovativeness
dimension and its antecedents. Journal of Organizational Change Management 20(3), 429-446
Rand Corporation. (2003). Technology Transfer of Federally Funded R & D. Science and Technology Policy
Institute.
Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø., and Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university
knowledge. Technovation, 26, 518–533.
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., and Jiang, L.(2006). University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature, in
S. Siegel. and M. Wright and A. Lockett (Eds), Special Issue of Industrial and Corporate Change “The Rise
of Entrepreneurial Activity at Universities: Organizational and Societal Implications”.
Rosenberg, N., and Nelson, R. R. (1994).American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry. Research
Policy, 23(3), 323–348.
Rogers, E.M., Takegami, S., and Yin, J. (2001). Lessons learned about technology transfer. Technovation, 21,
253 – 261.
Reamer, A., Icerman, L., and Youtie, J. (2003). Technology Transfer and Commercialization: Their Role in Economic
Development. Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington.
Servo, J.C. (1998). Commercialization and business planning guide for the post award period: design especially
for the technology entrepreneur. Dawn Breaker Press.
Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (Eds.). (2015). The Chicago handbook of university technology transfer
and academic entrepreneurship. University of Chicago Press.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L.E., Link, A. N.(2003a). Commercial knowledge transfers from
universities to firms: improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. Journal of High
Technology Management Research, 14, 111–33.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., and Link, A. N.(2003b). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the
relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27–48.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., 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 managmemt, 21, 115-142.
Siegel, D. (2006). University–industry knowledge flows: an overview, in Advancing Measures of Innovation:
Knowledge Flows, Business Metrics and Measurement Strategies. National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA
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(4), 640–60.
Shapira, P., and Wang, J. (2009). From lab to market? Strategies and issues in the commercialization of
nanotechnology in China. Asian Business and Management, 8(4), 461-489.
Samsom, K. J. and Gurdon, M. A. (1993). University scientists as entrepreneurs: a specialcase of technology
transfer and high-tech venturing. Technovation, 13(2), 63-71.
Shane, S.A. (2002). Selling University Technology Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), l22-137
SBIR Program Reauthorization. Act retrieved from http://sbir.gov/about/about-sbir.
Urabe, K. (1988). Innovation and the Japanese management system. In K. Urabe, J. Child, & T. Kagono (Eds.),
Innovation and management international comparisons. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Velez-Ocampo, J.; Herrera-Cano, C., & GonzalezPerez, M.A. (2016). The Peruvian Amazon Company’s Death:
The Jungle Devoured Them. Advanced Series in Management, 15, 35-46.
Yetisen, A.K., Kamrani, E., Volpatti, L.R., Butt, H., Coskun, A.F., Khademhosseini, A., Cho,S., & Yun, S.H.
(2015).Entrepreneurship. Lab Chip, 15,363
Walter, J., Lechner, C. and Kellermanns, F. (2008).Disentangling alliance management processes:
decisionmaking, politicality, and alliance performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 530-560.
Zarea, H., & Salamzadeh, A. (2012). Identification of Output Performance Indicators in Commercialization of
University Research: An AHP based Study of EFQM Model. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development,
4(15), 85-104.
Behavior and Organization, 52, 277–95.
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). (2003). AUTM Licensing Survey FY 2001., Association
of University Technology Managers.
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). (2010). Licensing Activity Survey FY2008. Association
of University Technology Managers.
Ayhan, M.B.(2015). A Fuzzy Ahp Approach For Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study In A Gearmotor
Company. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains (IJMVSC), 4(3). 11-23.
Bandarian, R. (2007). From Idea to Market in RIPI; An agile Frame for NTD Process. Journal of Technology
Management and Innovation, 2(1), JOTMI Research Group.
Bercovitz, J., and Feldmann, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: a conceptual
framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. The Journal of Technology
Transfer, 31, 175–188.
Bramwell, A., and Wolf, D. A., (2008). Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial
University of Waterloo. Research Policy, 37, 1175–1187.
Barnes, T., Pashby, I., and Gibbons, A. (2002). Effective University–Industry Interaction: A Multi-case
Evaluation of Collaborative R&D Projects. European Management Journal, 20, 272–285.
Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., and Burton, R. (2001). Organizational Structure as Determinants of
Academic Patent and Licensing Behavior: An Exploratory Study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania
State Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer 26, 21–35.
Brachos, D., Konstantinos, K., Soderquist, K.E., Prastacos, G. (2007). Knowledge Effectiveness, Social Context
and Innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11, 31-44.
Brooks, G., Heffner, A., & Henderson, D. (2014). A SWOT Analysis of Competitive Knowledge from Social
Media for A Small Start-Up Business. Review of Business Information Systems, 18(1), 23-34.
Boutkhoum, O., Hanine, M., Agouti, T., and Tikniouine, A. (2015). An improved hybrid multi-criteria/
multidimensional model for strategic industrial location selection: Casablanca industrial zones as a case
study. Springerplus. 4, 628.
Buckley, J. J., (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Systems, 17 (1), 233–247.
Castrogiovanni, G., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., Mas-Tur, A., and Roig-Tierno, N.(2016). Where to acquire knowledge:
Adapting knowledge management to financial institutions. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1812-1816
Chang, Y., Yang, P., and Chen, M. (2009). The determinants of academic research commercial performance:
Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6),936-946.
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., and Walsh, J.P. (2000). Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability
Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not). NBER Working Paper No. 7552.
Debackere, K. and Veugelers, R. (2005). The Role of Academic Technology Transfer Organizations in Improving
Industry Science Links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342.
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.
Feldman, M. P., Link, A. N., and Siegel, D. S. (2002). The economics of science and technology. Norwell, MA:
Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Friedman, J. and Silberman, J. (2003). University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and
Location Matter?. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 81–85.
Franklin, S., Wright, M., and Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and Surrogate Entrepreneurs in University Spin-out
Companies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 127–141.
Guzak, J. R., & Rasheed, A. A. (2014). Governance and growth of professional service firms. Service Industries
Journal, 34(4), 295-313.
Goktepe, D. (2004). Investigation of University Industry Technology Transfer Cases: A Conceptual and
Methodological Approach. Division of Innovation-LTH Lund University. Retrieved from www.infra.kth.se/
cesis/cesis/conference/Devrim%20Goktepe.pdf.
Gans, J. S., and Stern, S. (2003). The product market and the market for “ideas”: commercialization strategies
for technology entrepreneurs. Research Policy, 32, 333–350
Goldfarb, B. and Henrekson, M. (2003). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of
university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32, 639–658.
Gittelman, M. (2008). National institutions, public–private knowledge flows, and innovation performance: A
comparative study of the biotechnology industry in the US and France. Research Policy, 35(7), 1052-
1068.
Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Salamzadeh, A. (2014). Evolving Entrepreneurial Universities: Experiences and
challenges in the Middle Eastern context. in Fayolle, A. & Redford, D. T. (2014). Handbook of Research
in Entrepreneurship Education. Entrepreneurial University Handbook Volume 4 Cambridge: Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Salamzadeh, A. (2015). Entrepreneurial Transformation in the Middle East:
Experiences from Tehran Universities. Technics Technologies Education Management, 10(4), 533-537.
Götsén, A., Pettersson, B., (2016). Business Incubators - the savior of startups? - An exploratory study on
knowledge acquisition in a business incubator from a startup perspective. Master’s Thesis 30 credits
Department of Business Studies Uppsala University.
González-Pernía, J.L., Iñaki, G.K., & Peña-Legazkue. (2013). An Assessment of the Determinants of University
Technology Transfer. Economic Development Quarterly, 27(1), 6-17.
Gonzalez-Perez, M.A, Velez-Calle, A., Cathro, V., Caprar, D.V., & Taras, V.(2014). Virtual Teams and International
Business Teaching and Learning:The Case of the Global Enterprise Experience (GEE). Journal of Teaching
in International Business, 25(3), 200-213.
Gonzalez-Perez, M.A., and Leonard, L. (2013). Principles and strategies to balance ethical, social and
environmental concerns with corporate requirements. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Kasch, S., and Dowling, M. (2008). Commercialization strategies of young biotechnology firms: An empirical
analysis of the U.S. industry. Research Policy, 37, 1765–1777.
Knockaert, M., Vandenbroucke, E., Huyghe, A. (2012). Unraveling the need for innovation support services
in new technology-based firms: The impact of commercialization strategy. Science and public policy
(SPP), 40(1).
Kelley, D., Neck, H. M., O’Connor, G. C., & Paulson, A. (2005). Corporate entrepreneurship through radical
innovation: key organization and initiative level mechanisms. In Corporate entrepreneurship and
venturing (pp. 23-48). Springer US.
Khajeheian, D. (2013). “New Venture Creation in Social Media Platform; Towards a Framework for Media
Entrepreneurship”. In Handbook of Social Media Management (125-142). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Khajeheian, D (2016a), “Telecommunication Policy: Communication Act Update”. Global Media Journal-
Canadian Edition, 9(1) 135-141.
Khajeheian, D. (2016b). “Audience Commodification: A Source of Innovation in Business Models”. Technology
Innovation Management Review, 6(8), 40-47.
Landry, R., Amara, N., and Ouimet, M.(2007). Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from the
Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32,
561–592
Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., and Bozeman, B.(2007). An Empirical Analysis of the Propensity of Academics to
Engage in Informal University Technology Transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641-655.
Moray, N., & Clarysse, B. (2004). Institutional Change and the Resource Flows going to Spin off Projects: The
case of IMEC (No. 04/241). Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B., and Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The Growth of Patenting and Licensing
by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Efects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Research Policy, 30,
99–119.
MIT. (2015). An MIT Inventor’s Guide to Startups: for Faculty and Students. Technology Licensing Office.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (1999). Commercialization strategies In
Commercialization and Business Planning Guide for the Post-Award Period, Dawnbreaker Press, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 3, 37–46.
Ndonzuau, F. N., Pirnay, F., and Surlemont, B. (2002). A stage model of academic spin-off creation.
Technovation, 22, 281–289
Nilsson, A. S., Rickne, A., & Bengtsson, L. (2010). Transfer of academic research: uncovering the grey
zone. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 617-636.
OECD. (2002). Benchmarking Industry–Science Relationships. Paris: OECD.
Plewa, C. (2005). Differences in perceived benefits from university-industry relationships. In ANZMAC2005
Conference: Business Interaction, Relationships an Networks, University of Adelaide, South Australia.
Rutherford, M.W., & Holt D.T.(2007). Corporate entrepreneurship: An empirical look at the innovativeness
dimension and its antecedents. Journal of Organizational Change Management 20(3), 429-446
Rand Corporation. (2003). Technology Transfer of Federally Funded R & D. Science and Technology Policy
Institute.
Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø., and Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university
knowledge. Technovation, 26, 518–533.
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., and Jiang, L.(2006). University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature, in
S. Siegel. and M. Wright and A. Lockett (Eds), Special Issue of Industrial and Corporate Change “The Rise
of Entrepreneurial Activity at Universities: Organizational and Societal Implications”.
Rosenberg, N., and Nelson, R. R. (1994).American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry. Research
Policy, 23(3), 323–348.
Rogers, E.M., Takegami, S., and Yin, J. (2001). Lessons learned about technology transfer. Technovation, 21,
253 – 261.
Reamer, A., Icerman, L., and Youtie, J. (2003). Technology Transfer and Commercialization: Their Role in Economic
Development. Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington.
Servo, J.C. (1998). Commercialization and business planning guide for the post award period: design especially
for the technology entrepreneur. Dawn Breaker Press.
Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (Eds.). (2015). The Chicago handbook of university technology transfer
and academic entrepreneurship. University of Chicago Press.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L.E., Link, A. N.(2003a). Commercial knowledge transfers from
universities to firms: improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. Journal of High
Technology Management Research, 14, 111–33.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., and Link, A. N.(2003b). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the
relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27–48.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., 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 managmemt, 21, 115-142.
Siegel, D. (2006). University–industry knowledge flows: an overview, in Advancing Measures of Innovation:
Knowledge Flows, Business Metrics and Measurement Strategies. National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA
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(4), 640–60.
Shapira, P., and Wang, J. (2009). From lab to market? Strategies and issues in the commercialization of
nanotechnology in China. Asian Business and Management, 8(4), 461-489.
Samsom, K. J. and Gurdon, M. A. (1993). University scientists as entrepreneurs: a specialcase of technology
transfer and high-tech venturing. Technovation, 13(2), 63-71.
Shane, S.A. (2002). Selling University Technology Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), l22-137
SBIR Program Reauthorization. Act retrieved from http://sbir.gov/about/about-sbir.
Urabe, K. (1988). Innovation and the Japanese management system. In K. Urabe, J. Child, & T. Kagono (Eds.),
Innovation and management international comparisons. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Velez-Ocampo, J.; Herrera-Cano, C., & GonzalezPerez, M.A. (2016). The Peruvian Amazon Company’s Death:
The Jungle Devoured Them. Advanced Series in Management, 15, 35-46.
Yetisen, A.K., Kamrani, E., Volpatti, L.R., Butt, H., Coskun, A.F., Khademhosseini, A., Cho,S., & Yun, S.H.
(2015).Entrepreneurship. Lab Chip, 15,363
Walter, J., Lechner, C. and Kellermanns, F. (2008).Disentangling alliance management processes:
decisionmaking, politicality, and alliance performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 530-560.
Zarea, H., & Salamzadeh, A. (2012). Identification of Output Performance Indicators in Commercialization of
University Research: An AHP based Study of EFQM Model. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development,
4(15), 85-104.
Article Sidebar
Publicado
feb 28, 2017
Article Details
Cómo citar
Friedrichsen, M., Zarea, H., Tayebi, A., & Saeed Abad, F. A. (2017). Estrategias competitivas de conocimiento y comercialización de la innovación: un dofa unificado y un enfoque de proceso de análisis jerárquico difuso (fuzzy ahp). AD-Minister, (30), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.17230/ad-minister.30.3
Número
Sección
Artículos de investigación
Agencias de apoyo
Biografía del autor/a
Mike Friedrichsen, Universidad de Director de la Escuela Humboldt de Berlín.
Professor of media economics and media innovation at the Stuttgart Media University and FoundingDirector at the Humboldt School in Berlin. He studied Business Administration, Political Economics,
Journalism and Political Sciences in Kiel, Mainz and Berlin. He earned his doctorate at the Free University
of Berlin in 1996 at the Institute of empirical Market and Communication Research. His main
research interests are Media Management and Media Economics, Digital Communication, New Media
Technologies und Business Communication. Mike Friedrichsen emphasizes transfer between the
University and Economy and in leads several Networking Organizations. He is author and editor of
several books and has also published in different journals.
Hadi Zarea, Departamento de Planificación del Centro de Investigación de Zaminkav
Research fellow at department of planning in Zaminkav Research Center. Hadi earned his MA inEntrepreneurship with specialty in Public policy. He has been in charge of supervision in several research
projects for many national organizations and has received several awards. He appointed as the
supervisor of the national project of evaluation of 159 Universities by Ministry of Science, Research and
Technology. Hadi is an author of many academic articles in Innovation and Entrepreneurship both in
Persian and English.
Amin Tayebi, Universidad de Ciencia y Tecnología
MSc degree in industrial engineering from Iran University of Science and Technology. His mainresearch interest include system and productivity, Fuzzy AHP and Marketing management, Innovation
Management.
Fatemeh Asadi Saeed Abad, Universidad Islámica Azad
M.Sc. degree in IT engineering from Islamic Azad University. Her main research interests includeInformation engineering, computers and networks.
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
a. Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
b. Los autores pueden establecer por separado acuerdos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, situarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
c. Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir sus trabajos electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, ya que puede dar lugar a intercambios productivos, así como a una citación más temprana y mayor de los trabajos publicados (Véase The Effect of Open Access) (en inglés).