%0 Journal Article %1 Sorensen2007 %A Sorensen, Jill Ann Tarzian %A Chambers, Donald a. %D 2007 %J The Journal of Technology Transfer %K Access access,Performance benchmarking,Portfolio benefits,Open licensing,Humanitarian management metric,Equitable use,Nonmonetary %N 5 %P 534--547 %R 10.1007/s10961-007-9038-y %T Evaluating academic technology transfer performance by how well access to knowledge is facilitated––defining an access metric %U http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s10961-007-9038-y %V 33 %X Why should research institutions engage in technology transfer? Some say it is about the money. Others say it is about public service and benefit. In the end, we measure what we value. If we only measure money, we confound the non-profit mission of the research institution. If we measure economic impact, the non-profit technology transfer office is often expected to become the economic developer, confusing real estate and business development with technology transfer, often without additional funding. These mission strains lead to overwhelm, fatigue, service shortcomings, and unhappy customers across all classes of stakeholders. This article suggests a return to center for academic technology transfer offices (TTOs) by focusing on a most important question for drivers of our present global knowledge economy––how well does a TTO facilitate access to knowledge protected by intellectual property of its faculty and institution? This article proposes that academic technology transfer performance should be evaluated by how well a TTO avails access to knowledge. Given that performance measures are also referred to as ‘‘metrics,’’ we call this preferred outcomes orientation an access metric.

@article{Sorensen2007, abstract = {Why should research institutions engage in technology transfer? Some say it is about the money. Others say it is about public service and benefit. In the end, we measure what we value. If we only measure money, we confound the non-profit mission of the research institution. If we measure economic impact, the non-profit technology transfer office is often expected to become the economic developer, confusing real estate and business development with technology transfer, often without additional funding. These mission strains lead to overwhelm, fatigue, service shortcomings, and unhappy customers across all classes of stakeholders. This article suggests a return to center for academic technology transfer offices (TTOs) by focusing on a most important question for drivers of our present global knowledge economy––how well does a TTO facilitate access to knowledge protected by intellectual property of its faculty and institution? This article proposes that academic technology transfer performance should be evaluated by how well a TTO avails access to knowledge. Given that performance measures are also referred to as ‘‘metrics,’’ we call this preferred outcomes orientation an access metric.}, added-at = {2012-02-27T06:11:36.000+0100}, author = {Sorensen, Jill Ann Tarzian and Chambers, Donald a.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/25be428b439104e133eeb7564d923f838/kamil205}, doi = {10.1007/s10961-007-9038-y}, file = {:Users/Miguel/Dropbox/Escola/Artigos/Sorensen, Chambers\_2007\_Evaluating academic technology transfer performance by how well access to knowledge is facilitated––defining an access metric.pdf:pdf}, interhash = {9297846fbe0d6108bb34f203d9a9b7f4}, intrahash = {5be428b439104e133eeb7564d923f838}, issn = {0892-9912}, journal = {The Journal of Technology Transfer}, keywords = {Access access,Performance benchmarking,Portfolio benefits,Open licensing,Humanitarian management metric,Equitable use,Nonmonetary}, month = may, number = 5, pages = {534--547}, timestamp = {2012-02-27T06:11:37.000+0100}, title = {{Evaluating academic technology transfer performance by how well access to knowledge is facilitated––defining an access metric}}, url = {http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s10961-007-9038-y}, volume = 33, year = 2007 }