Research Article

Impact evaluation for University-Business Cooperation and Technology Transfer in higher education systems: cluster analysis

Gusberti, Tomoe Daniela Hamanaka; Dewes, Mariana de Freitas

Downloads: 0
Views: 798


Higher education systems evolved in recent decades. Universities must not only provide society with capable professionals but also act in the market for technologies, knowledge, and ideas to promote technological development. This paper discusses the motivational performance evaluation system for technology transfer process, specifically the patterns’ evaluation of academic units considering micro-cultures and idiosyncrasies’ analysis, in the academic context of autonomy. Based on action research, the existing performance evaluation system was assessed, and multivariate cluster analysis was proposed and tested as a method to enable micro cultures’ identification and evaluation. The analysis proposed enabled a tool for reflexive discussion regarding the effectiveness of the institutional innovation system in academic units and Engineering Education, and its implications for social and technological development of industry and society enabled action proposals for improvement in the university’s technology transfer management process.


Technology management. Technological innovation. Patents. Performance measurement system. University-industry interaction.


Ab Hamid, M. R. B. (2015). Value-based performance excellence model for higher education institutions. Quality & Quantity, 49(5), 1919-1944.

Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2010). Strategic options development. In M. Reynolds & S. Holwell (Eds.), Systems approaches to managing change: a practical guide (pp. 135-190). London: Springer London.

Ackoff, R. L. (1979). The future of operational research is past. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 30(2), 93-104.

Ackoff, R. L. (1981). The art and science of mess management. Interfaces, 11(1), 20-26.

Adams, N. M., Blunt, G., Hand, D. J., & Kelly, M. G. (2000). Data mining for fun and profit. Statistical Science, 15(2), 111-126.

Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44-60.

Argyres, N., & Liebeskind, J. P. (1998). Privatizing the intellectual commons: universities and the commercialization of biotechnology. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 35(4), 427-454.

Azevedo, C. S. (1992). Planejamento e gerência no enfoque estrategico-situacional de Carlos Matus. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 8(2), 129-133.

Barreyro, G. B., & Rothen, J. C. (2008). Para uma história da avaliação da educação superior brasileira: análise dos documentos do PARU, CNRES, GERES E PAIUB. Avaliação: Revista da Avaliação da Educação Superior, 13(1), 131-152.

Bourelos, E., Magnusson, M., & Mckelvey, M. (2012). Investigating the complexity facing academic entrepreneurs in science and engineering: the complementarities of research performance, networks and support structures in commercialisation. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36(3), 751-780.

Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 627-655.

Brasil. (2016, Janeiro 12). Dispõe sobre estímulos ao desenvolvimento científico, à pesquisa, à capacitação científica e tecnológica e à inovação e altera a Lei nº 10.973, de 2 de dezembro de 2004, a Lei nº 6.815, de 19 de agosto de 1980, a Lei nº 8.666, de 21 de junho de 1993, a Lei nº 12.462, de 4 de agosto de 2011, a Lei nº 8.745, de 9 de dezembro de 1993, a Lei nº 8.958, de 20 de dezembro de 1994, a Lei nº 8.010, de 29 de março de 1990, a Lei nº 8.032, de 12 de abril de 1990, e a Lei nº 12.772, de 28 de dezembro de 2012, nos termos da Emenda Constitucional nº 85, de 26 de fevereiro de 2015 (Lei nº 13.243, de 11 de janeiro de 2016). Diário Oficial da República Federativa do Brasil.

Breschi, S., & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectorial innovation systems: technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organizations (pp. 130-156). London: Pinter.

Bubela, T. M., & Caulfield, T. (2010). Role and reality: technology transfer at Canadian universities. Trends in Biotechnology, 28(9), 447-451. PMid:20598388.

Burbidge, J. (1995). Back to production management. Manufacturing Engineer, 74(2), 66-71.

Byström, K., & Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 31(2), 191-213.

Carraz, R., Nakayama, I., & Harayama, Y. (2014). Openness, open innovation à la Chesbrough and intellectual property rights. In T. Madiès, D. Guellec, & J. C. Prager (Eds.), Patent markets in the global knowledge economy theory, empirics and public policy implications: theory, empirics and public policyimplications (pp. 209-234). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Checkland, P. (2000). Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17(S1), S11-S58.<::AID-SRES374>3.0.CO;2-O.

Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2009). Evaluation and performance measurement of research and development: Techniques and Perspectives for multi-level analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Coriat, B., & Weinstein, O. (2002). Organizations, firms and institutions in the generation of innovation. Research Policy, 31(2), 273-290.

Czarnitzki, D., Hussinger, K., & Schneider, C. (2011). Commercializing academic research: the quality of faculty patenting. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(5), 1403-1437.

D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316-339.

De Fuentes, C., & Dutrénit, G. (2016). Geographic proximity and university-industry interaction: the case of Mexico. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(2), 329-348.

Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university – industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823-833.

Etzkowitz, H., & 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(2), 109-123.

Fortis, M. A. (2010). Rumo à pós-modernidade em políticas públicas: a epistemologia situacional de Carlos Matus. RAE-eletrônica, 9(2).

Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045-1057.

Grimpe, C., & Fier, H. (2009). Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 637-650.

Guellec, D., & Ménière, Y. (2014). Markets for patents: actors, workings and recent trends. In T. Madiès, D. Guellec, & J. C. Prager (Eds.), Patent markets in the global knowledge economy theory, empirics and public policy implications: theory, empirics and public policyImplications (pp. 9-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hiatt, S. R., Sine, W. D., & Tolbert, P. S. (2009). From pabst to Pepsi: the deinstitutionalization of social practices and the creation of entrepreneurial opportunities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(4), 635-667.

Hood, C. (1995). The “New Public Management” in the 1980s: variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93-109.

Keller, T., & Tergan, S.-O. (2005). Visualizing knowledge and information: an introduction. In S.-O. Tergan & T. Keller. Knowledge and information visualization Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3426 (pp. 1-23). New York: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Kerssens-van Drongelen, I. C., & Bilderbeek, J. (1999). R&D performance measurement: more than choosing a set of metrics. R & D Management, 29(1), 35-46.

Kerssens-van Drongelen, I. C., & Cook, A. (1997). Design principles for the development of measurement systems for research and development processes. R & D Management, 27(4), 345-357.

Lehtinen, J., & Ahola, T. (2010). Is performance measurement suitable for an extended enterprise? International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 30(2), 181-204.

Leitão, S. P. (1987). Indicadores de desempenho na universidade: uma avaliação. Revista de Administração Pública, 21(2), 55-72.

Lurie, N. H., & Mason, C. H. (2007). Visual representation: implications. Journal of Marketing, 71, 160-177.

Matus, C. (2006). O Plano como Aposta. In J. Giacomoni & J. L. Pagnussat (Eds.), Planejamento e Orçamento governamental (Vol. 1, pp. 115-144). Brasília: ENAP - Escola Nacional de Adminsitração Pública.

Meisel, S., & Mattfeld, D. (2010). Synergies of operations research and data mining. European Journal of Operational Research, 206(1), 1-10.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.

Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1983). Institutionalization and the rationality of formal organizational structure. In J. W. Meyer (Ed.), Organizational environments: ritual and rationality (pp. 261-282). Beverly Hills: SAGE.

Mintzberg, H., & Lampel, J. (1999). Reflecting on the strategy process. Sloan Management Review, 21-30.

Nārāyaṇan, V. K., & O’Connor, G. C. (2010). Encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation Management. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Niosi, J. (1999). Fourth-generation R&D: from linear models to flexible innovation. Journal of Business Research, 45, 111-117.

O’Keefe, R. M., & Preece, A. D. (1996). The development, validation and implementation of knowledge-based systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 92(3), 458-473.

Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2009). The two faces of collaboration: impacts of university-industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6), 1033-1065.

Phusavat, K., Anussornnitisarn, P., Helo, P., & Dwight, R. (2009). Performance measurement: roles and challenges. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109(5), 646-664.

Pidd, M. (2008). Tools for thinking: modelling in management science (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Pidd, M. (2010). Why modelling and model use matter. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61(1), 14-24.

Pillai, A. S., Joshi, A., & Rao, K. S. (2002). Performance measurement of R&D projects in a multi-project, concurrent engineering environment. International Journal of Project Management, 20(2), 165-177.

Power, D. J. (2008). Decision support systems: a historical overview. In D. J. Power. Handbook on decision support systems (International Handbooks Information System, pp. 121-140). New York: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363-377.

Rousseau, D. M. (2006). Is there such a thing as “evidence- based management”? Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 256-269.

Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Segenreich, S. C. D. (2005). O PDI como referente para avaliação de instituições de educação superior: lições de uma experiência. Ensaio. Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 13(27), 149-167.

Selden, S. C., & Sowa, J. E. (2004). Testing a multi-dimensional model of organizational performance: Prospects and problems. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, 14(3), 395-416.

Shane, S. A. (2004). Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Simon, H. A. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations. The American Economic Review, 69(4), 493-513.

Simon, H. A.(1997). Administrative behavior (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Taticchi, P., Tonelli, F., & Cagnazzo, L. (2010). Performance measurement and management: a literature review and a research agenda. Group, 14(1), 4-18.

Tergan, S.-O., Keller, T., & Burkhard, R. (2006). Integrating knowledge and information: digital concept maps as a bridging technology. Information Visualization, 5(3), 167-174.

Vedovello, C. (1997). Science parks and university-industry interaction: geographical proximity between the agents as a driving force. Technovation, 17(9), 491-531.

Voss, C. (2005). Paradigms of manufacturing strategy re-visited. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(12), 1223-1227.

Wieczorek, J., & Hekkert, M. P. (2012). Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: a framework for policy makers and innovation scholars. Science & Public Policy, 39(1), 74-87.

World Intellectual Property Organization. WIPO Statistics Datacenter. Geneva: WIPO. Retrieved in 5 August 2013, from

Wright, M., Vohora, A., & Lockett, A. (2004). The formation of high-tech university spinouts: the role of joint ventures and venture capital investors. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3/4), 287-310.

Zainko, M. (2008). Avaliação da educação superior no Brasil: processo de construção histórica. Avaliação, Campinas, 13(3), 827-831.

5b86ded10e88256019e4c89d production Articles
Links & Downloads


Share this page
Page Sections