Individual choice or institutional practice

Management Decision - 2010
StevenTello1, ScottLatham1, ValerieKijewski1
1College of Management, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts, USA

Tóm tắt

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the degree to which individual technology transfer officers' heuristics and biases, as well as peer technology transfer institutions' practices, influence the technology commercialization decision‐making process.Design/methodology/approachA qualitative method was used to gather data from technology transfer officers (TTO) regarding how they make commercialization decisions. Responses were examined in the context of rational choice theory and institutional theory in an attempt to discern whether common decision‐making practices are shared among officers from different institutions.FindingsThe subjects shared relatively few common organizational and professional decision‐making practices. The sample was relatively evenly divided by TTO with an individual heuristic bias and those with a rational approach to decision making. Individual heuristics influenced all subjects to varying degrees.Research limitations/implicationsThe TTO plays a central role in the technology commercialization process yet the paper found little evidence that professional practice and standards were integrated into decision‐making processes. Further research examining why this is the case, and examining if there is a relationship to outcome success, is warranted.Practical implicationsManagers need to better understand and monitor how decisions are made within individual offices. Technology transfer directors should conduct a process audit to determine the extent decision‐making processes are internally or externally defined, and then implement best practice where appropriate.Originality/valueVery few studies examine how TTO make commercialization decisions, and fewer examine this phenomenon in the context of both a rational choice and institutional theory framework.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Agrawal, A. (2006), “Engaging the inventor: exploring licensing strategies for university inventions and the role of latent knowledge”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 63‐79.

Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) (2007), US Licensing Activity Survey, Fiscal Year 2006, AUTM, Deerfield, IL, available at: www.autm.net/about/dsp.pubDetail2.cfm?pid=41 (accessed April 24, 2008).

Astebro, T. (2004), “Key success factors for technological entrepreneurs' R&D projects”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 314‐21.

Balachandra, R. and Friar, J. (1997), “Factors for success in R&D projects and new product innovation: a contextual framework”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 276‐87.

Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2005), “Assessing the relative performance of UK university technology transfer offices: parametric and non‐parametric evidence”, Research Policy, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 369‐84.

Daniels, J. and Cannice, M. (2004), “Interview studies in international business research”, in Marchan‐Piekkari, R. and Welch, C. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business, Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, MA, pp. 185‐206.

Dimaggio, P. and Powell, W. (1983), “The iron cage revisited – institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 147‐60.

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989a), “Making fast strategic decisions in high‐velocity environments”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, pp. 543‐76.

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989b), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, pp. 532‐50.

Eisenhardt, K.M. and Zbaracki, M. (1992), “Strategic decision making”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, Winter, pp. 17‐37.

Ericson, M. (2010), “Towards a sensed decision‐making approach; From déjà vu to vu jàdé”, Management Decision, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 132‐55.

Frederickson, J.W. (1985), “Effects of decision motive and organizational performance level on strategic decision processes”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 821‐43.

Galbraith, C., Ehrlich, S. and DeNoble, A. (2006), “Predicting technology success: identifying key predictors and assessing expert evaluation for advanced technologies”, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 673‐84.

Gavetti, G., Levinthal, D. and Rivkin, J. (2005), “Strategy‐making in novel and complex worlds: the power of analogy”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 691‐712.

Isenberg, D.J. (1986), “Thinking and managing: a verbal protocol analysis of managerial problem solving”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 775‐88.

Jensen, R., Thursby, J.G. and Thursby, M.C. (2003), “The disclosure and licensing of university investments: best we can do with the s**t we get to work with”, International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 21 No. 9, pp. 1271‐3000.

Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), “Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk”, Econometrica, Vol. 47, pp. 262‐91.

Lichtenthaler, U. and Ernst, H. (2009), “The role of champions in the external commercialization of knowledge”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 26, pp. 371‐87.

Light, R.J., Singer, J. and Willet, J. (1990), By Design: Conducting Research on Higher Education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Link, A. and Siegel, D. (2005), “University‐based technology initiatives: quantitative and qualitative evidence”, Research Policy, Vol. 34, pp. 253‐7.

Markman, G., Phan, P., Balin, D. and Gianodis, P. (2005), “Entrepreneurship and university‐based technology transfer”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 241‐63.

Markman, G., Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2008), “Research and technology commercialization”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 45 No. 8, pp. 1401‐23.

Markman, G., Gianodis, P. and Phan, P. (2009), “Supply‐side innovation and technology commercialization”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 625‐49.

Markham, S. (2000), “Corporate championing and antagonism as forms of political behavior: an R&D perspective”, Organization Science, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 429‐47.

Maxwell, J. (2005), Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Meseri, O. and Maital, S. (2001), “A survey analysis of university‐technology transfer in Israel: evaluation of projects and determinants of success”, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 26 Nos 1‐2, pp. 115‐26.

Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977), “Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 83, pp. 340‐63.

Oliver, C. (1997), “Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource‐based views”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 9, pp. 697‐713.

Siegel, D., Veugelers, R. and Wright, M. (2007), “Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 640‐60.

Siegel, D., Waldman, D. and Link, A. (2003), “Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study”, Research Policy, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 27‐48.

Simon, H. (1955), “A behavioral model of rational choice”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 99‐118.

Simon, H. (1991), “Bounded rationality and organizational learning”, Organization Science, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 125‐34.

Tolbert, P. and Zucker, L. (1983), “Institutional sources of change in the formal‐structure of organizations – the diffusion of civil‐service reform, 1880‐1935”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 22‐39.

Walter, A. (2003), “Relationship – specific factors influencing supplier involvement in customer new product development”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56, pp. 721‐33.

Yin, R.K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Method, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Yiu, D. and Makino, S. (2002), “The choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary: an institutional perspective”, Organization Science, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 667‐83.

Zhang, Y. and Rajagopalan, N. (2003), “Explaining new CEO origin: firm versus industry antecedents”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 46, pp. 327‐38.

Cooper, R.G. (1981), “An empirically derived new product project selection model”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 54‐61.

Goodwin, P. (2009), “Common sense and hard decision analysis: why might they conflict?”, Management Decision, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 427‐40.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Management Decision

Thông tin tác giả