MULTIMOORA as the instrument to evaluate the technology transfer process in higher education institutions

Abstract

This paper is presenting the model to assess the technology transfer (TT) process economic performance of universities. The main indicators were identified and empirical research with MULTIMOORA tool was performed on 7 Lithuanian state-funded universities. The data was gathered from the Research Council of Lithuania official public report for the period of [2012–2014]. The research results show that MULTIMOORA tool fits to evaluate the TT process economic performance of HEIs. The proposed model is applicable to assess different results of TT process activities in HEIs. MULTIMOORA is a multi-criteria non-subjective evaluation tool, allowing to increase the choices of alternatives and features, serving to select the best alternatives, moreover, enabling more efficient allocation of financial and human resources. MULTIMOORA tool allows extending the implementation onto other countries.

Bibliography

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

2. Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 82(1), 150-169.

3. Asif, M., & Searcy, C. (2014). Determining the key capabilities required for performance excellence in higher education. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 25(1-2), 22-35.

4. Baek, D. H., Sul, W., Hong, K. P., & Kim, H. (2007). A technology valuation model to support technology transfer negotiations. R&D Management, 37(2), 123-138.

5. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2006). Entpreprenerial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 175-188.

6. Bigliardi, B., Galati, F., Marolla, G., & Verbano, C. (2015). Factors affecting technology transfer offices' performance in the Italian food context. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(4), 361-384.

7. Bini, L., Dainelli, F., & Giunta, F. (2016). Business model disclosure in the strategic report: entangling intellectual capital in value creation process. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(1), 83-102.

8. Brauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010). Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), 5-24.

9. Caldera, A., & Debande, O. (2010). Performance of Spanish universities in technology transfer: An empirical analysis. Research Policy, 39(9), 1160-1173.

10. Cao, Y., Zhao, L., & Chen, R. (2009). Institutional structure and incentives of technology transfer: Some new evidence from Chinese universities. Journal of technology management in China, 4(1), 67-84.

11. Cattaneo, M., Meoli, M., & Signori, A. (2016). Performance-based funding and university research productivity: the moderating effect of university legitimacy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), 85-104.

12. 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.

13. Closs, L., Cardozo Ferreira, G., Freitas Soria, A., Hoffmann Sampaio, C., & Perin, M. (2012). Organizational factors that affect the university-industry technology transfer processes of a private university. Journal of technology management & innovation,

14. Collier, A. (2007). Australian framework for the commercialisation of university scientific research. Prometheus, 25(1), 51-68.

15. Conti, A., & Gaule, P. (2011). Is the US outperforming Europe in university technology licensing? A new perspective on the European Paradox. Research Policy, 40(1), 123-135.

16. Curi, C., Daraio, C., & Llerena, P. (2015). The productivity of French technology transfer offices after government reforms. Applied Economics, 47(28), 3008-3019.

17. De-Carli, E., Ferasso, M., Segatto, A., & Alves, F. (2016). The Dilemma of Industry-University Cooperation Processes within Technology Transfer Offices: Evidence from Three Brazilian Case Studies.

18. De Beer, C., Secundo, G., Passiante, G., & Schutte, C. S. (2017). A mechanism for sharing best practices between university technology transfer offices. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 15(4), 523-532.

19. Decter, M., Bennett, D., & Leseure, M. (2007). University to business technology transfer—UK and USA comparisons. Technovation, 27(3), 145-155.

20. Eraslan, E., & Atalay, K. D. (2014). A comparative holistic fuzzy approach for evaluation of the chain performance of suppliers. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2014.

21. Erdogan, S. A., Šaparauskas, J., & Turskis, Z. (2017). Decision making in construction management: AHP and expert choice approach. Procedia engineering, 172, 270-276.

22. Feng, H. I., Chen, C. S., Wang, C. H., & Chiang, H. C. (2012). The role of intellectual capital and university technology transfer offices in university-based technology transfer. The Service Industries Journal, 32(6), 899-917.

23. Franklin, S. J., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 127-141.

24. Ghorabaee, M. K., Zavadskas, E. K., Amiri, M., & Turskis, Z. (2016). Extended EDAS method for fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making: an application to supplier selection. International journal of computers communications & control, 11(3), 358-371.

25. Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748-764.

26. Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Entrepreneurial activity and regional competitiveness: evidence from European entrepreneurial universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), 105-131.

27. Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2012). Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK universities. Research policy, 41(2), 262-275.

28. Hsu, D. W., Shen, Y. C., Yuan, B. J., & Chou, C. J. (2015). Toward successful commercialization of university technology: Performance drivers of university technology transfer in Taiwan. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, 25-39.

29. Hülsbeck, M., Lehmann, E. E., & Starnecker, A. (2013). Performance of technology transfer offices in Germany. The journal of technology transfer, 38(3), 199-215.

30. Lafuente, E., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2017). Assessing the productivity of technology transfer offices: An analysis of the relevance of aspiration performance and portfolio complexity. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1-24.

31. Lazauskas, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Šaparauskas, J. (2015). Ranking of priorities among the baltic capital cities for the development of sustainable construction. Economics and Management.

32. Li, C. (2018). Evaluation of the financial and economic development of the European Union member states on basis of multiple indicators changed to multiple objectives. Economics and Management.

33. Liu, H. C., You, J. X., Lu, C., & Chen, Y. Z. (2015). Evaluating health-care waste treatment technologies using a hybrid multi-criteria decision making model. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 932-942.

34. Matt, M., & Schaeffer, V. (2012). The cooperative strategy of technology transfer offices: A longitudinal study. In Technology transfer in a global economy (pp. 51-72). Springer, Boston, MA.

35. McAdam, R., Miller, K., McAdam, M., & Teague, S. (2012). The development of University Technology Transfer stakeholder relationships at a regional level: Lessons for the future. Technovation, 32(1), 57-67.

36. Miller, K., McAdam, R., & McAdam, M. (2018). A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda. R&D Management, 48(1), 7-24.

37. Nielsen, K. (2015). Human capital and new venture performance: the industry choice and performance of academic entrepreneurs. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(3), 453-474.

38. Oehler, A., Höfer, A., & Schalkowski, H. (2015). Entrepreneurial education and knowledge: Empirical evidence on a sample of German undergraduate students. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(3), 536-557.

39. Pastor, J. M., Serrano, L., & Zaera, I. (2015). The research output of European higher education institutions. Scientometrics, 102(3), 1867-1893.

40. Rademakers, M. (2005). Corporate universities: driving force of knowledge innovation. Journal of workplace Learning, 17(1/2), 130-136.

41. Rossi, F., & Rosli, A. (2015). Indicators of university–industry knowledge transfer performance and their implications for universities: evidence from the United Kingdom. Studies in Higher Education, 40(10), 1970-1991.

42. Sharifi, H., Liu, W., & Ismail, H. S. (2014). Higher education system and the ‘open’knowledge transfer: a view from perception of senior managers at university knowledge transfer offices. Studies in Higher Education, 39(10), 1860-1884.

43. 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.

44. Siksnelyte, I., Zavadskas, E. K., Bausys, R., & Streimikiene, D. (2019). Implementation of EU energy policy priorities in the Baltic Sea Region countries: Sustainability assessment based on neutrosophic MULTIMOORA method. Energy Policy, 125, 90-102.

45. Souzangarzadeh, H., Rezvani, M. J., & Jahan, A. (2017). Selection of optimum design for conical segmented aluminum tubes as energy absorbers: Application of MULTIMOORA method. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 51, 546-560.

46. Stanujkic, D. (2016). An extension of the ratio system approach of MOORA method for group decision-making based on interval-valued triangular fuzzy numbers. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 22(1), 122-141.

47. Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Smarandache, F., Brauers, W. K., & Karabasevic, D. (2017). A neutrosophic extension of the MULTIMOORA method. Informatica, 28(1), 181-192.

48. Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Vasiljević, M., Stojić, G., & Korica, S. (2017). Novel integrated multi-criteria model for supplier selection: Case study construction company. Symmetry, 9(11), 279.

49. Tian, Z. P., Wang, J., Wang, J. Q., & Zhang, H. Y. (2017). An improved MULTIMOORA approach for multi-criteria decision-making based on interdependent inputs of simplified neutrosophic linguistic information. Neural Computing and Applications, 28(1), 585-5

50. Tseng, A. A., & Raudensky, M. (2014). Performance evaluations of technology transfer offices of major US research universities. Journal of technology management & innovation, 9(1), 93-102.

51. Wolszczak-Derlacz, J. (2017). An evaluation and explanation of (in) efficiency in higher education institutions in Europe and the US with the application of two-stage semi-parametric DEA. Research Policy, 46(9), 1595-1605.

52. Zavadskas, E. K., Bausys, R., Juodagalviene, B., & Garnyte-Sapranaviciene, I. (2017). Model for residential house element and material selection by neutrosophic MULTIMOORA method. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 64, 315-324.

53. Zavadskas, E. K., Antucheviciene, J., Saparauskas, J., & Turskis, Z. (2013). MCDM methods WASPAS and MULTIMOORA: verification of robustness of methods when assessing alternative solutions. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research

54. Zavadskas, E. K., Antucheviciene, J., Hajiagha, R., Hossein, S., & Hashemi, S. S. (2015). The interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy MULTIMOORA method for group decision making in engineering. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015.

55. Zhurakovska, M. B. (2013). Economic Monitoring of Technology Transfer Offices Activity. Scientific Bulletin of National Mining University, (1), 113–120.