臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

Academic innovations are now transferred to industries at high frequencies worldwide. An appropriate intellectual property (IP) right ensures the financial benefits of academic researchers and their academic settings. IP commercialization is not only strengthening the open innovation system, it is improving economy of academic settings across the nation as well.
It is thus important to understand the status of current commercialization activity of academics. Correction of frailty and adoption of pertinent new policies will accelerate the IP commercialization of academic settings. With evaluation of current scenario, this study proposes a model for facilitating academic IP commercialization in Taiwan. This study validates four out of five hypotheses relating to the proposed model through a survey among academic researchers in Taiwan. Academic researchers are willing to commercialize their innovations. However, the outcome is not impressive owing to the complex procedures for acquiring IP rights, the search for prospective industrial partners, and lack of effective negotiation. The survey results demonstrate the requirement for functional technology transfer offices (TTOs) in academic settings. Patent-pool formation by TTOs is revealed as a measure to facilitate commercialization process. Patent-pooling creates more openness to all participating members and enables firms to obtain essential licenses in one-stop. This study provides information and measures for facilitating IP commercialization that will improve the research application status of academic settings in Taiwan.

Recommendation letter: Supervisor..............................................................
Certificate: Thesis review committee...........................................................
Acknowledgement....................................................................................iii
Abstract.....................................................................................................iv
Table of Contents........................................................................................v
List of Figures...........................................................................................vii
List of Tables.............................................................................................ix
Chapter 1: Introduction.............................................................................1
1.1 Background of the study................................................................5
1.2 Importance of the study..................................................................7
1.3 Research objective.........................................................................8
1.4 Research limitation........................................................................9
1.5 Research framework....................................................................11
Chapter 2: Literature review...................................................................12
2.1 Open Innovation...........................................................................13
2.2 Intellectual Property.....................................................................15
2.2.1 Intellectual Property commercialization............................18
2.3 Technology Transfer Office.........................................................23
2.4 Summary......................................................................................26
Chapter 3: Methodology.........................................................................27
3.1 Hypothesis & conceptual model..................................................27
3.2 Questionnaire survey designing...................................................31
3.3 Participant Selection.....................................................................31
3.4 Data source, type & collection.....................................................32
3.5 Data analysis................................................................................34
Chapter 4: Results & statistical analysis.................................................36
4.1 Demographic statistics.................................................................36
4.2 Statistical analysis........................................................................39
4.3 Hypotheses validity......................................................................44
4.4 Summary......................................................................................52
Chapter 5: Discussion.............................................................................54
Chapter 6: Overall Conclusion................................................................59
6.1 Future recommendations..............................................................60
References................................................................................................62
Annexure: Survey questionnaire.............................................................72


List of Figures
Figure 1: Schematic diagram describes the success rates of
innovation commercialization with weighted strategies
adopted by Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI),
Taiwan.
……4
Figure 2: Statistics of domestic patent application in Taiwan
during 2012-2014.
……6
Figure 3: Innovation models: Closed and Open. ……14
Figure 4: Schematic diagram of open innovation model
describes the possible ways of licensing.
……19
Figure 5: Schematic diagram explaining the importance of
patent-pool in open innovation model.
……21
Figure 6: Conceptual model of improved academic research
commercialization with formation of patent-pool by
technology transfer offices.
……30
Figure 7: Gender distribution of academic researchers
participating in the survey.
……37
Figure 8: Academic ranks the participants. ……37
Figure 9: Age distribution of the participants. ……37
Figure 10: Commercializing experience of academic
researchers participating in the survey.
……37
Figure 11: Institutional burden for commercialization in the
perspective of innovations by the participants.
given in the left column.
……38
Figure 12: Current status and future intention of research
commercialization of the participants. Y-axis represents a 5
……39
order Likert scale starting from LEAST (1) to MOST (5)
likely for each situation
Figure 13: Bar graphs represent relative effectiveness of
technology transfer offices in the situations given in the left
column. Y-axis represents a 5 order likert scale starting from
LEAST (1) to MOST (5) likely for each situation given in the
left column.
……40
Figure 14: Bar graphs represent relative effectiveness of
technology transfer offices in the situations given in the left
column. Y-axis represents a 5 order Likert scale starting from
LEAST (1) to MOST (5) likely for each situation given in the
left column.
……42
Figure 15: Bar graphs represent the role of patent-pool in open
innovation system. Y-axis represents a 5 order Likert scale
starting from LEAST (1) to MOST (5) likely for each
situation given in the left column.
……43
Figure 16. Schematic diagram of hypotheses validity. ……52



List of Tables
Table 1: Model summary of Hypothesis 1. ........................................45
Table 2: ANOVA table of Hypothesis 1. ........................................45
Table 3: Coefficient table of Hypothesis 1. ........................................45
Table 4: Model summary of Hypothesis 2. ........................................46
Table 5: ANOVA table of Hypothesis 2. ........................................47
Table 6: Coefficient table of Hypothesis 2. ........................................47
Table 7: Model summary of Hypothesis 3. ........................................48
Table 8: ANOVA table of Hypothesis 3. ........................................48
Table 9: Coefficient table of Hypothesis 3. ........................................48
Table 10: Model summary of Hypothesis 4. ........................................49
Table 11: ANOVA table of Hypothesis 4. ........................................49
Table 12: Coefficient table of Hypothesis 4. ........................................49
Table 13: Model summary of Hypothesis 5. ........................................50
Table 14: ANOVA table of Hypothesis 5. ........................................51
Table 15: Coefficient table of Hypothesis 5. ........................................51
Table 16. Hypotheses test summary. ........................................51

Ahrweiler, P., Pyka, A., & Gilbert, N. (2011). A New Model for University-Industry Links in Knowledge-Based Economies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28, 218-235.
Allen, R. W., Madison, D. L., Porter, L. W., Renwick, P. A., & Mayes, B. T. (1979). Organizational politics: tactics and characteristics of its actors. California Management Review, 22, 77-83.
Allen, T. J., & Cohen, S. I. (1969). Information flow in research and development laboratories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 12-19. doi: 10.2307/2391357.
Amesse, F., & Cohendet, P. (2001). Technology Transfer Revisited from the Perspective of the Knowledge-Based Economy. Research Policy, 30, 1459-1478. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00162-7.
Anderson, R. A., & Gaffini, N. T. (1998). Competition Policy and Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Economy. University of Calgary Press.
Andi, & Minato, T. (2003). Design documents quality in the Japanese construction process. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 537-546.
Arvanitis, S., & Woerter, M. (2009). Firms strategies with Universities and the relationship with firms innovation performance. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18, 1067-1106.
Arvanitis, S., Kubli, U., & Worter, M. (2005). Determinants of knowledge and technology transfer activities between firms and science institutions in Switzerland: an analysis based on firm data. KOF-Working Papers. Working Paper 05-116.
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). (2015). AUTM Licensing Activity Survey: FY2014.
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). (2014). AUTM U.S. Licensing Activity Survey: FY2014.
Blumberg, B. (2005). Business Research Methods. McGraw-Hill Education.
Boyle, J., & Jenkins, J. (2014). Intellectual Property: Law & The Information Society Cases & Materials. Create Space Independent Publishing Platform (1st ed.). Retrieved from http://web.law.duke. edu/cspd/pdf/ IPCasebook2014.pdf on July 20, 2016.
Brant, J., & Lohse, S. (2014). The open Innovation model. ICC (International Chamber of Commerce) Innovation and Intellectual Property Research Paper No. 2. 450, 1081-1082. ISBN: 978-92-842-0257-7.
Carl, S. (2001). Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting (Chapter 4). Innovation Policy and the Economy. Ed. A. B. Jaffe, J. Lerner & S. Scott. MIT Press.1, 119-150.
Carlsson, B., & Fridh, A. C. (2002). Technology transfer in United States universities- A survey and statistical analysis. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12, 199-232.
Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L., & Sekaran, U. (2001). Applied Business Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Milton, Queensland.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open innovation: a new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. Oxford University Press.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44, 35-41.
Chesbrough, H. W., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (2008). Open Innovation: Researching A New Paradigm. OUP Oxford.
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not). Working paper series. The National Bureau of Economic Research. USA. NBER Working Paper No. 7552.
Colyvas, J. A., Crow, M., Gelijns, A. C., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R., Rosenberg, N., & Sampat, B. N. (2002). How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice?, 48, 61-72. doi:10.1287/mnsc.48.1. 61.14272.
Cooper, D. R., & Schindler,‬ P. S. (2003).‬‬ Business Research Methods. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Copyright Law of The United States of America and related Laws contained in the Title of The United States Code. Works unprotected by copyright law. Chapter 1: An Overview of Copyright, Section II.E. Ideas Versus Expression. Retrieved from www.copyright.gov on July 19, 2016.
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36, 316-339.
Debackere, K. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34, 321-342.
Di Minin, A., & Faems, D. (2013). Building appropriation advantage: An introduction to the special issue on intellectual property management. California Management Review. 55, 7-14.
Dubiansky, J. (2006). The Role of Patents in Fostering Open Innovation. Virginia Journal of Law & Technology, 11, 7.
Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823-833.
European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). (2013). Intellectual property rights intensive industries: contribution to economic performance and employment. European Union Industry-Level Analysis Report. Retrieved from https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/web/observatory /ip-contribution July 02, 2016.
European Union. (2015). Intellectual property management in open innovation. European IPR helpdesk Fact sheet. Retrieved from www.iprhelpdesk.eu on June 29, 2016.
Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows (2nd ed.), Sage, London.
Foley, H. C. (2012). A new approach to intellectual property management and industrially funded research at Penn State. Research-Technology Management. September-October 2012. doi:10.5437/08956308X5505 008).
Frankelius, P. (2009). Questioning two myths in innovation literature. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 20, 40-51. doi:10. 1016/ j.hitech.2009.02.002.
Freeman, C. (1997). The Economics of Industrial Innovation. MIT Press.
Gilbert, C., Kristjuhan, A., Winkler, G. S., & Svejstrup, J. Q. (2004). Elongator interactions with nascent mRNA revealed by RNA immunoprecipitation. Molecular Cell, 14, 457-64.
Hall, J., Bachor, V., & Matos, S. (2014). Technology strategy and legitimization processes: capturing profi ts or promising technology left on the shelf? California Management Review, 56, 98-117.
Halsey, A. H. (1995). Decline of Donnish Dominion: the British Academic Professions in the Twentieth Century. Clarendon Press. UK. ISBN: 97801982797 30.
Han, J., & Kamber, M. (2006). Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. (2nd ed.). The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. ISBN 1-55860-9016.
Hanel, P. (2006). Intellectual property rights business management practices: A survey of the literature . Technovation, 26, 895-931.
Huang, T., Wang, W.-C., Ken, Y., Tseng, C.-Y., & Lee, C.-L. (2010). Managing Technology Transfer In Open Innovation: The Case Study In Taiwan Modern Applied Science, 4, 2. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.553 9/mas.v4n10p2).
Idris, K. (2003). Intellectual property a power tool for economic growth. World Intellectual Property Organization. (2nd ed.). WIPO Publication No. 888.1. ISBN 92-805-1231-6.
Ismail, K., Wan Omar, W. Z., & Majid, I. A. (2011). The commercialisation process of patents by universities. African Journal of Business Management, 5, 7198-7208.
Jeitschko, T. D., & Zhang, N. (2014). Adverse Effects Of Patent Pooling On Product Development And Commercialization. The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, 14, 27-57. doi: 10.1515/bejte-2013-0038.
Lai, W.-H. (2011). Willingness-to-engage in technology transfer in industry–university collaborations. Journal of Business Research, 64, 1218-1223.
Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’?. Research Policy, 40, 1354-1368.
Lampe, R. L., & Moser, P. (2009). Do Patent Pools Encourage Innovation? Evidence From The 19th-Century Sewing-Machine Industry. Nber Working Paper Series. Working Paper 15061. Retrieved from http://www. nber.org/papers/w15061 May 18, 2016.
Laroche, E., & Amara, N. (2011). Transfer activities among Canadian researchers: Evidence in occupational safety and health. Safety Science, 49, 406-415.
Lerner, J., & Tirole, J. (2004). Efficient Patent Pools. American Economic Review, 94, 691-711.
Lin, B. W., & Berg, D. (2001). Effects of cultural difference on technology transfer projects: an empirical study of Taiwanese manufacturing companies. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 287-293.
Martin, M. J. (2007). University perspective on commercialization of IP. Research-Technology Management, 50, 13-16. doi:10.1080/08956 308.2007. 11657457.
Maryville, S. (1992). Entrepreneurship in the Business Curriculum. Journal of Education for Business, 68, 27-31.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. MIT joint program on the science and policy of Global Change. Retrieved from http://global change.mit.edu July 22, 2016.
McQueen, R. A., & Knussen, C. (2002). Research Methods for Social Science: An Introduction. Longman Group. United Kingdom. ISBN-13: 978-0130404565.
Mowery, D. C. (2011). Learning from one another? International policy “emulation” and university–industry technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20, 1827-1853. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtr063.
Murray, F. (2004). The Role of Academic Inventors in Entrepreneurial Firms: Sharing the Laboratory Life. Research Policy, 33, 643-659.
O’Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: A conceptual framework. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 653-666.
Perkmann, M., & Salter, A. (2012). How to create productive partnerships with universities. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53, 79-88.
Ponomariov, B. L. (2008). Effects of university characteristics on scientists’ interactions with the private sector: an exploratory assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 485-503.
Powers, J. B. (2005). Buying in or selling out? The commercialization of the American Research University. Review of Higher Education, 29, 138-139.
Public official report Administrative Council for the Economic Defense (CADE). (2009). Retrieved from www.cade.gov.br/temp/t211220 1212114382.pdf April 16, 2016.
Santoro, M. D., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2000). The institutionalization of knowledge transfer activities within industry–university collaborative ventures. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17, 299-319.
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach (4th ed.). Wiley Publishers. ISBN-13: 978-0471203667.
Shane, S. (2001). Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Management science, 47, 205-220.
Sherwood, A. L., & Covin, J. G. (2008). Knowledge acquisition in university-industry alliances: an empirical investigation from a learning theory perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 162-179.
Siegel, D. S., & Phan, P. (2005). Analyzing the effectiveness of university technology transfer: implications for entrepreneurship education. 16: 1-38. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. eISBN: 978-1-84950-359-4.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27-48.
Sine, W. D., Shane, S., & Gregorio, D. D. (2003). The halo effect and technology licensing: The influence of institutional prestige on the licensing of university inventions. Management Science, 49, 478-496.
Somaya, D., Teece, D., & Wakeman, S. (2011). Innovation In Multi-Invention Contexts: Mapping Solutions To Technological And Intellectual Property Complexity. California Management Review, 53, 47-79.
Swamidass, P. M., & Vulasa, V. (2008). Why university inventions rarely produce income? Bottlenecks in university technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 343- 363.
Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). (2015). TIPO statistics report: patent and trademark application 2014. Retreived from https://www. tipo.gov.tw/lp.asp?CtNode=6687&CtUnit=3199&BaseDSD=7&mp=2&nowPage=7&pagesize=10 on July 15, 2016.
Teece, D. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation. Research Policy, 15, 285-305.
Vanderford, N. L., Weiss, L. T., & Weiss, H. L. (2013). A Survey of the Barriers Associated with Academic-based Cancer Research Commercialization. Plos one. 8, e72268. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0072268.
Wang, B., Shyu, J. Z., & Cheng, C. C. (2007). Changing technology transfer strategies in a non-profit organization-An examination of ITRI. International journal of innovative computing, information & control, 5, 1527.
Wang, P., Tong, T. W., & Koh, C. P. (2004). An integrated model of knowledge transfer from MNC parent to China subsidiary. Journal of World Business, 39, 168-182.
Waroonkun, T., Stewart, R. A., & Mohamed, S. (2005). International technology transfer in construction: process performance evaluation. CIB W102 Conference on Information and Knowledge Management in a Global Economy: Challenges and Opportunities for Construction Organizations, Lisbon, Portugal, 119-127.
Wei, L. (1995). International technology transfer and development of technological capabilities: A theoretical framework. Technology in Society, 17, 103-120.
Wikipedia. The Sewing-Machine Combination. Retrieved from http://www.sil.si.edu/DigitalCollections/hst/cooper/pdf/SIL1008 999-0055.pdf on January 13, 2016.
Woolgar, L. (2007). New institutional policies for university-industry links in Japan. Research Policy, 36, 1261-1274.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2008). Fields of Intellectual Property Protection. Chapter 2. WIPO Intellectual Property Handbook: Policy, Law and Use.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2015). Intellectual property commercialization. WIPO Factsheet. Document code: CDIP/16/INF/4.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2014a). Making Design Registration Cheaper and Easier. Retrieved from http://www.wipo.int /pressroom/en/briefs/sct on February 28, 2016.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2014b). Patent Pools And Antitrust- A Comparative Analysis. Retrieved from http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ipcompetition/en/studies/patent_pools_report.pdf on July 15, 2016.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2012). The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Right: A Case Book,(3rd ed.).