text:
The Journal of Technology Transfer
A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature
Alejandro Bengoa
Amaia Maseda
Txomin Iturralde
Gloria Aparicio
This study explores academic research on technology transfer (TT) and the related themes. The TT field has attracted considerable scholarly attention in recent years and has grown rapidly, resulting in a large body of knowledge. Using a bibliometric approach, this study reviews related research issues as well as their influence and connections and provides directions for future research. It uses Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science database that includes 3218 bibliographic references. Several bibliometric analysis techniques and a subsequent review of the content of the most relevant documents are adopted. The performance analysis provided an updated overview of the evolution of the TT literature from 1969 to 2018 and quantitatively identified the most active and influential journals, articles, authors, and organizations. The co-authorship network analysis allowed us to identify and visualize the structure of relations between authors as well as determine the collaboration patterns among them. On the basis of the information supplied by the co-authorship network, the main literature was reviewed to identify the current status and research trends related to TT, identifying five main research streams and related topics. The implications of the study's findings and directions for future TT research are finally discussed to enhance our understanding of TT agents and issues and support further research in this field.
Technology transfer Bibliometrics Performance analysis Co-authorship analysis
M15 O3
The authors gratefully acknowledge comments and suggestions from Dr. Donald Siegel and anonymous referees on earlier versions of this paper. Any errors and misjudgements remain the responsibility of the authors.
Funding for this research was provided by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation & Universities (MCIU/AEI/FEDER-UE) under the Grant Number RTI2018-097579-B-100, by UPV/EHU under the Grant Number GIU16/46, and by FESIDE.
The authors declare that they have not conflict of interest.
Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., & Hossain, L. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Infometrics,5(4), 594–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C. A., Di Costa, F., & Solazzi, M. (2009). University–industry collaboration in Italy: A bibliometric examination. Technovation,29(6), 498–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abreu, M., & Grinevich, V. (2013). The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities. Research Policy,42(2), 408–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agarwal, R., Echambadi, R., Franco, A. M., & Sarkar, M. B. (2004). Knowledge transfer through inheritance: Spin-out generation, development, and survival. Academy of Management Journal,47(4), 501–522.Google Scholar
Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science,48(1), 44–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitken, B. J., & Harrison, A. E. (1999). Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela. American Economic Review,89(3), 605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apriliyanti, I. D., & Alon, I. (2017). Bibliometric analysis of absorptive capacity. International Business Review,26(5), 896–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archibugi, D., & Pietrobelli, C. (2003). The globalization of technology and its implications for developing countries: Windows of opportunity or further burden? Technological Forecasting and Social Change,70(9), 861–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autio, E., & Laamanen, T. (1995). Measurement and evaluation of technology transfer: Review of technology transfer mechanisms and indicators. International Journal of Technology Management,10(7–8), 643–664.Google Scholar
Baier-Fuentes, F., Merigo, J. M., Amoros, J. E., & Gaviria-Marín, M. (2019). International entrepreneurship: A bibliometric overview. International Entrepreneurship Management Journal,15(2), 385–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balconi, M., Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2004). Networks of inventors and the role of academia: An exploration of italian patent data. Research Policy,33(1), 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balzat, M., & Hanusch, H. (2004). Recent trends in the research on national innovation systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,14(2), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battistella, C., De Toni, A. F., & Pillon, R. (2016). Inter-organizational technology/knowledge transfer: A framework from critical literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer,41(5), 1195–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science,19(1), 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierly, P. E., III, Damanpour, F., & Santoro, M. D. (2009). The application of external knowledge: Organizational conditions for exploration and exploitation. Journal of Management Studies,46(3), 481–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birley, S. (2002). Universities, academics, and spinout companies: Lessons from imperial. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education,1(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
Blackman, D., & Benson, A. M. (2012). Overcoming knowledge stickiness in scientific knowledge transfer. Public Understanding of Science,21(5), 573–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blomström, M., & Sjöholm, F. (1999). Technology transfer and spillovers: Does local participation with multinationals matter? European Economic Review,43(4–6), 915–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozeman, B. (1994). Evaluating government technology transfer: Early impacts of the cooperative technology paradigm. Policy Studies Journal,22(2), 322–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy,29(4), 627–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies,30(3), 439–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruneel, J., D'Este, P., & Salter, A. (2010). Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration. Research Policy,39(7), 858–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casillas, J., & Acedo, F. (2007). Evolution of the intellectual structure of family business literature: A bibliometric study of FBR. Family Business Review,20(2), 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of UK university technology transfer offices: parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy,34(3), 369–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G., & Xiao, L. (2016). Selecting publication keywords for domain analysis in bibliometrics: A comparison of three methods. Journal of Informetrics,10(1), 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E., & Vohora, A. (2005). Spinning out new ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing,20(2), 183–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An aproach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical a lication to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics,5(1), 146–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT: A new science ma ing analysis software tool. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,63(8), 1609–1630.Google Scholar
Cobo, M. J., Martinez, M. A., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Fujita, H., & Herrera-Viedma, E. F. (2015). 25 years at knowledge-based systems: A bibliometric analysis. Knowledge-Based Systems,80, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,35, 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colyvas, J. A., & Powell, W. W. (2006). Roads to institutionalization: The remaking of boundaries between public and private science. Research in Organizational Behavior,27, 305–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cui, A. S., Griffith, D. A., Cavusgil, S. T., & Dabic, M. (2006). The influence of market and cultural environmental factors on technology transfer between foreign MNCs and local subsidiaries: A croatian illustration. Journal of World Business,41(2), 100–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy,36(9), 1295–1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics. Lanham: Scarecrow Press Inc.Google Scholar
Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy,32(2), 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djokovic, D., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Spinouts from academic institutions: A literature review with suggestions for further research. The Journal of Technology Transfer,33(3), 225–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elkins, T., & Keller, R. T. (2003). Leadership in research and development organizations: A literature review and conceptual framework. The Leadership Quarterly,14(4), 587–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy,27(8), 823–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy,32(1), 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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, 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. P., Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2002). The economics of science and technology: An overview of initiatives to foster innovation, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, F., Zhang, L., Du, Y., & Wang, W. (2015). Visualization and quantitative study in bibliographic databases: A case in the field of university–industry cooperation. Journal of Informetrics,9(1), 118–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frame, J. D. (1979). National economic resources and the production of research in lesser developed countries. Social Studies of Science,9(4), 233–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, C. (1989). Technology policy and economic performance Pinter. London: Publishers Great Britain.Google Scholar
Gaviria-Marín, M., Merigó, J. M., & Baier-Fuentes, H. (2019). Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,140, 194–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisler, E. (1993). Technology transfer: Toward mapping the field, a review, and research directions. The Journal of Technology Transfer,18(3–4), 88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. (2009). The governance of university knowledge transfer: A critical review of the literature. Minerva,47(1), 93–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy,35(6), 790–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giunta, A., Pericoli, F. M., & Pierucci, E. (2016). University–Industry collaboration in the biopharmaceuticals: the Italian case. The Journal of Technology Transfer,41(4), 818–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopalakrishnan, S., & Santoro, M. D. (2004). Distinguishing between knowledge transfer and technology transfer activities: The role of key organizational factors. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,51(1), 57–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görg, H., & Greenaway, D. (2004). Much ado about nothing? Do domestic firms really benefit from foreign direct investment? The World Bank Research Observer,19(2), 171–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, R., Redding, S., & Van Reenen, J. (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of Economics and Statistics,86(4), 883–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy,40(8), 1045–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly,44(1), 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayter, C. S. (2015). Public or private entrepreneurship? Revisiting motivations and definitions of success among academic entrepreneurs. The Journal of Technology Transfer,40(6), 1003–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayter, C. S. (2016). Constraining entrepreneurial development: A knowledge-based view of social networks among academic entrepreneurs. Research Policy,45(2), 475–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinzl, J., Kor, A., Orange, G., & Kaufmann, H. R. (2013). Technology transfer model for Austrian higher education institutions. The Journal of Technology Transfer,38(5), 607–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy,35(5), 715–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsieh, C., Lu, L. Y., Liu, J. S., & Kondrashov, A. (2014). A literature review with citation analysis of technology transfer. In Management of engineering and technology (PICMET). 2014 Portl& international conference on IEEE.Google Scholar
Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe—The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics,14, 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science,3(3), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotabe, M., Martin, X., & Domoto, H. (2003). Gaining from vertical partnerships: knowledge transfer, relationship duration, and supplier performance improvement in the US and Japanese automotive industries. Strategic Management Journal,24(4), 293–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, S. (2015). Co-authorship networks: A review of the literature. Aslib Journal of Information Management,67(1), 55–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lam, A. (2011). University–industry collaboration: careers and knowledge governance in hybrid organizational space. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances,2(1/2), 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, P. J., Koka, B. R., & Pathak, S. (2006). The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. Academy of Management Review,31(4), 833–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leyden, D. P., Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2008). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the decision to locate on a university research park. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,55(1), 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, C., Tan, B., & Chang, S. (2002). The critical factors for technology absorptive capacity. Industrial Management and Data Systems,102(6), 300–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M. D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy,34(7), 981–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy,34(7), 1043–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Franklin, S. (2003). Technology transfer and universities' spin-out strategies. Small Business Ecponomics,20(2), 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Wild, A. (2015). The institutionalization of third stream activities in UK higher education: The role of discourse and metrics. British Journal of Management,26(1), 78–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy,31(2), 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madhok, A. (1997). Cost, value and foreign market entry mode: The transaction and the firm. Strategic Management Journal,18(1), 39–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malik, K. (2002). Aiding the technology manager: A conceptual model for intra-firm technology transfer. Technovation,22(7), 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing,20(2), 241–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, B. R. (2012). Are universities and university research under threat? Towards an evolutionary model of university speciation. Cambridge Journal of Economics,36(3), 543–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melin, G., & Persson, O. (1996). Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics,36(3), 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moed, H., De Bruin, R., & Van Leeuwen, T. (1995). New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics,33(3), 381–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, T. H. (2001). Parental supervision: The new paradigm for foreign direct investment and development. Washington DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980. Research Policy,30(1), 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowery, D. C., & Oxley, J. E. (1995). Inward technology-transfer and competitiveness—The role of national innovation systems. Cambridge Journal of Economics,19(1), 67–93.Google Scholar
Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal,17(2), 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowery, D. C., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2002). Learning to patent: Institutional experience, learning, and the characteristics of US university patents after the Bayh–Dole Act, 1981–1992. Management Science,48(1), 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murgado-Armenteros, E. M., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Torres-Ruiz, F. J., & Cobo, M. J. (2015). Analysing the conceptual evolution of qualitative marketing research through science mapping analysis. Scientometrics,102(1), 519–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murovec, N., & Prodan, I. (2009). Absorptive capacity, its determinants, and influence on innovation output: Cross-cultural validation of the structural model. Technovation,29(12), 859–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mustar, P., Renault, M., Colombo, M. G., Piva, E., Fontes, M., Lockett, A., et al. (2006). Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multi-dimensional taxonomy. Research Policy,35(2), 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naseer, M. M., & Mahmood, K. (2009). Use of bibliometrics in LIS research. LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal,19(2), 1–21.Google Scholar
Nilsson, A. S., Rickne, A., & Bengtsson, L. (2010). Transfer of academic research: Uncovering the grey zone. Journal of Technology Transfer,35(10), 617–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noh, H., & Lee, S. (2017). Where technology transfer research originated and where it is going: A quantitative analysis of literature published between 1980 and 2015. The Journal of Technology Transfer,44(3), 700–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research,14, 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy,34(7), 994–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D'Este, P., et al. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy,42(2), 423–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2007). University–industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews,9(4), 259–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Persson, O., Danell, R., & Schneider, J. W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. In F. Åström, R. Danell, B. Larsen, & J. Schneider (Eds.), Celebrating scholarly communication studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday (Vol. 5, pp. 9–24). International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics.Google Scholar
Pirnay, F., Surlemont, B., & Nlemvo, F. (2003). Toward a typology of university spin-offs. Small Business Economics,2(4), 355–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranga, L., Debackere, K., & Tunzelmann, N. (2003). Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: A case study of basic vs. a lied research in belgium. Scientometrics,58(2), 301–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, E. B., & Malonet, D. E. (1996). Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from research and development organizations. R&D Management,26(1), 17–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change,16(4), 691–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, R., & Dodgson, M. (1992). European technology policy evolution: Convergence towards SMEs and regional technology transfer. Technovation,12(4), 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2001). Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal,22(3), 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saggi, K. (2002). Trade, foreign direct investment, and international technology transfer: A survey. The World Bank Research Observer,17(2), 191–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampat, B. N. (2006). Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh–Dole. Research Policy,35(6), 772–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitz, A., Urbano, D., Dandolini, G. A., de Souza, J. A., & Guerrero, M. (2017). Innovation & entrepreneurship in the academic setting: A systematic literature review. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,13(2), 369–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schraven, D. F., Hartmann, A., & Dewulf, G. P. (2015). Research orientations towards the 'management'of infrastructure assets: An intellectual structure a roach. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering,11(2), 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,23(4), 640–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy,32(1), 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & 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(1–2), 115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, D. S., & Wessner, C. (2012). Universities and the success of entrepreneurial ventures: Evidence from the small business innovation research program. The Journal of Technology Transfer,37(4), 404–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2015). Academic entrepreneurship: Time for a rethink? British Journal of Management,26(4), 582–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skute, I., Zalewska-Kurek, K., Hatak, I., & de Weerd-Nederhof, P. (2017). Mapping the field: A bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations. The Journal of Technology Transfer,44(3), 916–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Small, H. (1999). Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,50(9), 799813.Google Scholar
Spithoven, A., Clarysse, B., & Knockaert, M. (2010). Building absorptive capacity to organise inbound open innovation in traditional industries. Technovation,30(2), 130–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal,17(2), 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szulanski, G. (2000). The process of knowledge transfer: A diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,82(1), 9–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szulanski, G., Ringov, D., & Jensen, R. J. (2016). Overcoming stickiness: How the timing of knowledge transfer methods affects transfer difficulty. Organization Science,27(2), 304–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teece, D. J. (1977). Technology transfer by multinational firms: The resource cost of transferring technological knowledge. Economic Journal,87(346), 242–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teixeira, A. A., & Mota, L. (2012). A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links. Scientometrics,93(3), 719–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal,44(5), 996–1004.Google Scholar
Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric ma ing. Scientometrics,84(2), 523–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Oorschot, J. A. W. H., Hofman, E., & Halman, J. I. M. (2018). A Bibliometric review of the innovation adoption literature. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,134, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volberda, H. W., Foss, N. J., & Lyles, M. A. (2010). Perspective—Absorbing the concept of absorptive capacity: How to realize its potential in the organization field. Organization Science,21(4), 931–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wahab, S. A., Rose, R. C., Jegak, U., & Abdullah, H. (2009). A review on the technology transfer models, knowledge-based and organizational learning models on technology transfer. European Journal of Social Sciences,10(1), 551–564.Google Scholar
Wahab, S. A., Rose, R. C., & Osman, S. I. W. (2012a). Defining the concepts of technology and technology transfer: A literature analysis. International Business Research,5(1), 61–71.Google Scholar
Wahab, S. A., Rose, R. C., & Osman, S. I. W. (2012b). The Theoretical perspectives underlying technology transfer: A literature review. International Journal of Business and Management,7(2), 277–288.Google Scholar
Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing,21(4), 541–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J.-Y., & Blomström, M. (1992). Foreign-investment and technology transfer—A simple-model. Europena Economc Review,36(1), 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., & Knockaert, M. (2008). Mid-range universities' linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Research Policy,37(8), 1205–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy,35(4), 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Q., Mudambi, R., & Meyer, K. E. (2008). Conventional and reverse knowledge flows in multinational corporations. Journal of Management,34(5), 882–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review,27(2), 185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods,18(3), 429–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
View author's OrcID profile
1.IK4-Tekniker Technology CentreEibarSpain
2.Faculty of Economics and BusinessUniversity of the Basque Country, UPV/EHUBilbaoSpain
Bengoa, A., Maseda, A., Iturralde, T. et al. J Technol Transf (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09774-5


text:
UPDATE 4-Scholz takes over as German chancellor, ending Merkel era
* Social Democrat receives clear majority in parliament
* Scholz takes oath of office after nomination by president
* Merkel hands over chancellery amid various challenges (Adds Scholz skipping religious reference in oath of office)
By Michael Nienaber
BERLIN, Dec 8 (Reuters) - German lawmakers elected Social Democrat Olaf Scholz as chancellor on Wednesday, ending 16 years of conservative rule under Angela Merkel and paving the way for a pro-European government that has promised to boost green investment.
Scholz, 63, who over the past four years served as vice chancellor and finance minister in coalition with Merkel, got a clear majority of 395 votes from lawmakers in the lower house of parliament, Bundestag President Baerbel Bas said.
Wearing a black face mask, Scholz waved as he received a standing ovation from lawmakers and lavish bouquets of flowers and a basket of apples from the leaders of the parliamentary parties.
Scholz was formally nominated by President Frank-Walter Steinmeier in the nearby Bellevue Palace before returning to parliament to take the oath of office in front of lawmakers and become Germany's ninth chancellor since the end of World War Two.
Scholz swore, among other things, to devote his energies to the welfare of the German people. But he did not ask for God's help, a phrase that is usually included in the oath of office and was spoken by Merkel.
Back in Bellevue Palace, the ministers of the new cabinet received their appointment certificates from the president.
In the afternoon, Merkel will officially hand over the chancellery to Scholz as the country faces a brutal fourth wave of coronavirus infections and challenges to its democratic order from authoritarian governments.
With his down-to-earth and no-nonsense manner, Scholz has positioned himself as Merkel's natural successor and a safe pair of hands to steer Europe's largest economy through challenges ranging from tackling the climate crisis to dealing with a more confrontational Russia and increasingly assertive China.
Scholz will lead an unprecedented three-way ruling coalition on the federal level with the pro-spending, environmentalist Greens and the fiscally more conservative, libertarian Free Democrats (FDP) - unlikely political bedfellows in the past.
Scholz is an experienced negotiator and veteran politician who as SPD party secretary general from 2002 until 2004 defended controversial labour market reforms and social welfare cuts under former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.
As labour minister from 2007-2009 in Merkel's first ruling coalition, Scholz pushed for a generous short-time work scheme that helped protect millions of workers from the fallout of the global financial crisis.
After being mayor of the northern port city of Hamburg from 2011-2018, Scholz returned to Berlin as Merkel's finance minister - a role in which he got rid of the goal of balanced budgets and enabled record new borrowing to shield companies and employees from the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.
On the European level, he worked closely with France and persuaded Merkel to support a debt-financed European Recovery Fund worth 800 billion euros ($900 billion) to help EU member states hit hardest by COVID-19.
Merkel, 67, a lover of opera and hiking in the little spare time she has had in the last 16 years, has given few clues about what she plans to do in retirement.
($1 = 0.8861 euros) (Reporting by Michael Nienaber, editing by Miranda Murray, Angus MacSwan and Bernadette Baum)
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez met Monday in the Spanish capital to align their left-wing governments' agendas and...
Leftists Scholz and Sanchez try to coordinate on budgets, migration
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez will seek consensus during talks in Madrid on Monday over more left-leaning policies...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Delta Air Lines Inc. London to San Francisco Flights
Return flight: San Francisco – London
London – San Francisco
Delta Air Lines Inc.
Cheapflightsplus.com will find cheap Delta Air Lines Inc. flights from London to San Francisco. Compare airline ticket prices and book air tickets starting from $1 554 from trusted online travel agencies, web sites and directly from airlines. Check flights schedule of Delta Air Lines Inc., arrivals and departure details below.
Find Cheap Airfare London — San Francisco (CA) by Delta Air Lines Inc.
To find cheap tickets choose a day of your departure with attractive price on the graph below and click «Find flights». For round trip flights please click «Check prices for return flight». The cheapest airfare is in january: one-way - $1554, two-way – $2665.
San Francisco — London
Cheap Flights from London to San Francisco by Delta Air Lines Inc.
Look at the list of plane tickets for the most popular direct and connecting flights by Delta Air Lines Inc., their prices start from $1 554. The fastest nonstop flight takes 11h 20m. The fastest connecting flight — 13h 55m.
11h 20m Delta Air Lines Inc.
14h 50m - Paris
2h 0m - Paris
11:06 am+1 день
11h 50m - Boston
2h 45m - Detroit
10h 31m - New York
Delta Air Lines Inc. Flight Schedule London to San Francisco
3:30 pm — 6:50 pm DL4362 Delta Air Lines Inc.
10:30 am — 1:50 pm DL5303 Delta Air Lines Inc.
7:25 pm — 11:25 pm DL4809 Delta Air Lines Inc.
New York — San Francisco
London — Amsterdam
Amsterdam — San Francisco
12:30 pm — 5:19 pm DL29 Delta Air Lines Inc.
London — Atlanta
Atlanta — San Francisco
18h 5m stop
4:35 pm — 11:06 am
London — Boston
7:05 am — 11:06 am DL1856 Delta Air Lines Inc.
Boston — San Francisco
London — Paris
Paris — San Francisco
9:40 am — 1:20 pm DL4039 Delta Air Lines Inc.
London — Detroit
Detroit — San Francisco
6:25 am — 8:45 am DL8619 Delta Air Lines Inc.
Paris — New York
There is 1 flight by Delta Air Lines Inc. from London to San Francisco every week with departures from Gatwick, London City, Heathrow, Luton, Stansted, Stratford International Rail St, Ebbsfleet International Rail St, London Biggin Hill, London-Waterloo, British Rail Terminal. All flights arrive at San Francisco, Embarkadero, China Basin Heliport.
Departures start from 10:30 am to 9:40 am. Nonstop flight is 11h 20m. The time difference between London and San Francisco is 8h.
The cheapest flight by Delta Air Lines Inc. that our users were able to find is $1 554. This airfare is economy class on one-way DL8619 flight for December 25, 2018 leaving Heathrow in London at 6:25 am, it includes all taxes and additional fees.
Delta Air Lines Inc. Airplanes on the Route
List of the most popular Delta Air Lines Inc. airplanes flying from London to San Francisco:
Besides Delta Air Lines Inc. there are other 3 airline carriers between London and San Francisco. Please review schedules and prices from the most popular airlines to find the best airfare deals from London to San Francisco.
There are 1 direct flights every day from London. Airlines and fares are below:


text:
CPIC plans strategic offshore investments after UK listing
Jolie Ho
China's third-largest insurer will target long-term strategic investments into overseas insurers after its $1.81 billion GDR listing in London, says its group chief investment officer.
China Pacific Insurance (CPIC), which has become the first Chinese insurer to be listed in the three markets of Shanghai, Hong Kong and London, intends to make strategic investments into overseas insurers after its new UK share issuance.
"Most of the funds raised from the GDRs [global depositary receipts] will be used for long-term strategic investments around the core business," Benjamin Deng, group chief investment officer, told AsianInvestor.
The insurer has raised $1.81 billion by issuing 102,873,300 GDRs at $17.60 each. The final price, which was set on Tuesday (June 16), is the lowest end of its indicative price range of $17.60-$19.00 per GDR. One GDR represents five A-shares of the insurer.
Benjamin Deng
According to its listing prospectus, CPIC had said it intends to use 70% or more of the net proceeds to develop the group's businesses overseas. These include equity investments, partnerships and alliances, as well as acquisitions in both developed and emerging markets to support the growth of its core business. Deng didn't provide further details on the acquisition plans.
Up to 30%, or the remainder of the net proceeds, will be used to develop an overseas platform to invest in innovative businesses, such as healthcare, aged care and technology, leveraging CPIC's offshore investment capabilities, it said.
Deng also said that the GDR listing would have an indirect impact on the group's investment portfolio. Following any potential significant investments into insurers in markets with growth potential, there will be foreign-currency liabilities, and CPIC would need to invest in overseas assets to match these liabilities, Deng explained.
The insurer may then leverage the capabilities of its offshore investment arm CPIC Investment Management (CPIC IM) for possible financial investments. CPIC IM was re-established in Hong Kong last year after it was closed in 2013 as the insurer did not have a big appetite for offshore assets back then. But the unit is now expanding its team to help its parent insurer build up its overseas asset portfolio.
Deng said the new funds raised will not substantially invest for financial investments such as listed equities and bonds, as the returns for the investments are not high enough to meet GDR investors' requirements on return on investments, he added. That suggests may instead be used to help CPIC to fund strategic investments into promising companies or to buy into private assets such as private equity.
As of December 2019, the total asset under management of CPIC Group reached Rmb2.04 trillion ($288.43 billion), of which Rmb623.8 billion was from third parties.
Deng also said that the GDR listing could help to optimise CPIC's shareholding structure and further enhance its corporate governance standards, as the composition of its shareholders would become more international.
"Our largest shareholders are state-owned entities. The investors we will try to attract for the GDR listing are mainly long-term overseas investors," he said.
This would bring CPIC closer to global standards in its management and investment strategies, which are crucial for attracting international investors. Such a move can help to enhance CPIC's international profile too, he said.
Swiss Re has agreed to become a cornerstone investor in CPIC's listing, and it will acquire no more than 1.5% of the total number of ordinary shares issued at the final price.
CPIC's GDR listing is conducted under the London-Shanghai Connect scheme that was established last year. It is the first-ever stock trading link between China and a financial centre in Europe. Huatai Securities became the first Chinese issuer under the trading scheme.
This listing would help to strengthen the economic and trade relationship between China and the UK, and showcase the opening up of China's capital markets to the world, CPIC said in its prospectus.
#china#cpic#insurer#london#londonshanghai connect


It was another weekend trip for the books - I hiked up a mountain (ish), drank a plethora of champagne while driving a boat, and slept in a jail for 48 hours with one of my best friends. Why yes, we were locked up abroad in the picturesque town of Lake Lucerne. Life could be worse, right?
Switzerland is a country that is very dear to my heart, after all my mom and I travel to Zermatt every year to ski -- Read: 50 Shades of Blue: Zermatt -- Although I have never had the chance to experience Switzerland during the summer. I guess that is one excuse to book a weekend trip. The trip started with a bus ride from work to the Dusseldorf airport where we decided to buy a few bottles of champagne to celebrate a weekend away from home - anything to celebrate with champagne, right? There is a direct flight on Germanwings which leaves at 18:55 (DUS - Zurich) and the views from above are spectacular as always.
From Zurich, we took a train to Lucerne. With the help of basic social skills (no smartphones, maps or GPS) we wandered aimlessly around Lucerne asking taxi drivers, and drunken citizens alike where the 'Jail Hotel' was - are these two American girls seriously trying to get arrested or something? Regardless, Jill and I decided to stay in an old Jail cell for the weekend because why not? It was pretty creepy at first (no lights in the hallways, arrived late at night, in the middle of what we thought was no where), but our white-walled cell grew on us as the weekend commenced. It ended up being located in the center of the old town which worked out perfectly.
We wandered over to the tourist office in our hiking boots (thank you trivago on tour ) and asked the kind lady behind the counter "Where can we go hiking?" - 20 min later we ended up at the bottom of Mount Pilatus, hiking through the swiss farmland; surrounded by cows, corn fields and chalets.
1,000 shameless calories later, we hiked our asses 12 meters to the gondola because we were cold and tired... the view was worth it.
The day was still young, so we explored around town, went back to jail, showered and got ready for the night. We found ice at a local restaurant (shout out to restaurant mama julia?) to chill our champagne, and made our way over to the lake to enjoy the sunset and live music near the city center.
I'll keep this short, but let me just say 1. The Swiss are very trusting with their motor vehicles because they let us rent a boat on Lake Lucerne for a few hours... no license or anything. 2. Friends help friends drink champagne.
Our flight back to Dusseldorf was at 20:55 - we were back to work Monday morning like it was all a dream. Moral of the story - Switzerland is perfect.


text:
module.exports.Errors = {};

/**
 * ExtendedError
 * @extends Error
 * @memberof module:swagger-test
 * @alias module:swagger-test.Errors.ExtendedError
 * @property {number} code
 * @property {string} message
 */
module.exports.Errors.ExtendedError = class extends Error {
  constructor(body) {
    super(body.message);
    for (const k of Object.keys(body)) {
      this[k] = body[k];
    }
  }
};

/**
 * NotFound
 * @extends Error
 * @memberof module:swagger-test
 * @alias module:swagger-test.Errors.NotFound
 * @property {string} message
 */
module.exports.Errors.NotFound = class extends Error {
  constructor(body) {
    super(body.message);
    for (const k of Object.keys(body)) {
      this[k] = body[k];
    }
  }
};

/**
 * InternalError
 * @extends Error
 * @memberof module:swagger-test
 * @alias module:swagger-test.Errors.InternalError
 * @property {number} code
 * @property {string} message
 */
module.exports.Errors.InternalError = class extends Error {
  constructor(body) {
    super(body.message);
    for (const k of Object.keys(body)) {
      this[k] = body[k];
    }
  }
};

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


For Season 5 of When Calls the Heart, I was asked to work as the Production Designer with Vicki Southeran, Producer. I worked with Hallmark & to bring across an updated look and feel for this new season. Hallmark wanted to bring more color into "Hope Valley" and clean up the town.
We started off the season with a fantastic Xmas Holiday Special and then added 11 episodes.
It was great to work again with Directors: Neil Fearnley, Martin Wood, Peter DeLuise & Mike Rohl.


text:
William "Bill" Condon, född 22 oktober  1955, är en amerikansk manusförfattare och filmregissör.

Filmer
Condon har skrivit och regisserat bland annat Gods and Monsters (1998), Kinsey (2004) och Dreamgirls (2006). Han har även regisserat nyinspelningen av Skönheten och odjuret (2017).

Referenser

Män
Födda 1955
Levande personer
Amerikanska filmregissörer
Amerikanska regissörer under 1900-talet
Amerikanska regissörer under 2000-talet
Amerikanska manusförfattare under 1900-talet
Amerikanska manusförfattare under 2000-talet
Personer från New York

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia