Expenence from the 1980s has demonstrated that commonly used "automatic" and "dissemination/diffusion" models of technology transfer are inadequate to guide practice in the 1990s Technology transfer is an increasingly complex process, fraught with difficulties.
Understanding technology transfer, and initiating actions to assist it to occur, is facilitated by conceptualising transfer as a communication process involving ongoing interaction and negotiation of meanings between researchers and clients
Implications for practice of the adoption of a communica tion model of technology transfer are analysed, with particular attention being paid to the need for boundary spanning "go betweens", or "linkage champions", to manage the vital com munication aspects of technology transfer
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
A. Brett, D. Gibson and R. Smilor, eds. University Spin-off Companies Economic Development, Faculty Entrepreneurs, and Technology Transfer (Rowen and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ, 1990).
2.
A. Davies, Winding up and running down: Resistance to the adoption of new technology in the British horological industry dunng the nineteenth century. Paper presented to Conference on Technology, Communication and the Humanities, Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, University of Edinburgh, 1988.
3.
R. Dorf and K. Worthington, Models for commercialisation of technology from universities and research laboratones, Journal of Technology Transfer12 (1) (1987) 1-8.
4.
G. Dosi, Sources and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation An Assessment of Recent Findings SPRU, Sussex, 1986).
5.
L. Georghiou et al, Post Innovation Performanc ( MacMillan, London, 1986).
6.
D. Gibson, E. Rogers and K. Wohlert, A communication-based model of technology transfer. Paper presented at International Communication Association Conference, Dublin, June 1990.
7.
D. Gibson, F. Williams and K. Wohlert, The state of the field: a bibliographic view of technology transfer. In: F. Wiliams and D. Gibson, eds. Technology Transfer: a Communication Perspective (Sage, Newbury Park, 1990) 277-292.
8.
E. Glaser, H. Abelson and K. Garnson, Putting Knowledge to Use (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1983).
9.
E. Hawthorne , The Transfer of Technology ( OECD, Pans, 1970).
10.
J. Hendry, Technology, marketing and culture: the politics of new product development . In. R. Mansfield, ed. Frontiers of Management (Routledge, London, 1989) 96-108.
11.
H. Irwin , Territoriality, boundary spanning and the development of communication theory, Australian Journal of Communication7 (1985) 1-12.
12.
R. Keller and W. Holland, Boundary spanning roles in an R and D organisation, Academy of Management Journal18 (1975) 388-393
13.
J. Kenny, ed., Research Administration and Technology Transfer New Directions for Higher Education No. 63 (Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1988).
14.
A. Kwiram, Innovative industry-university linkages: Is there a missing link in our economic development chain? In: K. Walters, ed. Entrepreneurial Management (Ballinger, Cambridge, MA, 1989) 17-34.
15.
G. McFall and J. McKelvey, The co-operative extension service: a model for technology transfer, Journal of Technology Transfer14 (1) ( 1989) 40-45.
16.
J. McIntyre and D. Papp, The Political Economy of International Technology Transfer ( Quorum, New York, 1986)
17.
E. More, Information systems—people issues, Journal of Information Science16 (1990) 311-319.
18.
R. Nelson (1987). Understanding Technical Change as an Evolutionary Process (North-Holland, Amsterdam , 1987).
19.
D. Organ .Linking pins between organizations and environments , Business Horizons14 (1971) 73-80.
20.
E. RogersDrffusion of Innovations ( Free Press, New York. 1983).
21.
E. Rogers and G. SchoemakerCommunication of Innovations: a Cross Cultural Approach ( Free Press, New York, 1971 ).
22.
D. Scott-Kemmis .T. Darling and R. JohnstonInnovation for the 1990s. New Challenges for Technology Policy and Strategy (GP [for DITAC], Canberra, 1988).
23.
R. Segman , Communicating technology: an historical view , Technology Transfer14 (3 and 4) (1989 ) 46-52.
24.
J. Slack, Communication Technologies and SocietyConceptions of Causality and the Politics of Technological Intervention (Ablex, Norwood, NJ, 1984).
25.
R. Stankiewicz , Academics and Entrepreneurs Developing University-Industry Relations (Pinter, London, 1986).
26.
L. Steele.Managing Technology, the Strategic view ( Mc-Graw-Hill, New York, 1989).
27.
G. Stewart and D. Gibson, University and Industry linkages: the Austin, Texas study In: F. Williams and D. Gibson , eds. Technology Transfer. a Communication Perspective (Sage, Newbury Park, 1990) 109-131.
28.
M. Tushman and T. Scanlan, Boundary spanning individuals: their role in information transfer, Academy of Management Journal24 (2) ( 1981) 289-305.
29.
R. Welio , Strategies for promoting technology transfer to the private sector, Journal of Technology Transfer11 (2) (1987) 43-65.
30.
F. Williams and D. Gibson, eds, Technology Transfer a Communication Perspective (Sage, Newbury Park, 1990).
31.
S. Hiltz, Online Communities a Case Study of the Office of the Future ( Ablex, Norwood, NJ. 1984).
