연구동향 분석
박사

연구자의 기술이전 성과에 영향을 주는 요인 분석

이재헌 2016년

논문상세정보
인용/피인용
' 연구자의 기술이전 성과에 영향을 주는 요인 분석' 의 주제별 논문영향력
논문영향력 선정 방법
논문영향력 요약
주제
  • 기술료
  • 기술이전
  • 연구성과
  • 지식확산
  • 특허피인용
동일주제 총논문수 논문피인용 총횟수 주제별 논문영향력의 평균
280 0

0.0%

' 연구자의 기술이전 성과에 영향을 주는 요인 분석' 의 참고문헌

  • 특허청
    정부 R&D 특허성과조사분석 보고서 [2013]
  • 특허와 기술혁신 및 경제발전 상관관계
    정성철 (과학기술정책연구원) [2004]
  • 특허 인용의 영향요인 분석을 통한 예측 모형 구축에 관한 연구
    유재복 연세대학교 박사학위 논문 [2009]
  • 지식재산위원회
    시장 주도 IP 기술거래 활성화 방안 [2015]
  • 정책(사업)평가를 위한 구조방정식모형(SEM)의 이론과 응용
    강기춘 감사원 평가연구원 평가리뷰 [2006]
  • 자원기반 관점에서 본 대학의 기술사업화 성과 영향요인 에 대한 연구
    조현정 지식재산연구 7(3), 218-245 [2012]
  • 연구성과의 기술이전 및 사업화 촉진요인 도출 및 실증분석
    구본철(Ku, Bon Chul) 벤처창업연구, 9(5), 69-81 [2014]
  • 연구개발성과에 영향을 미치는 지식재산요인
    이성상 이재헌 조근태 디지털융복합연구, 12(6), 203-213 [2014]
  • 산학연 공동연구의 협상 모델에 관한 연구
    김만진 김이경 이도형 한국과학기술기획평가원, 연구보고서 2013-003. [2013]
  • 산업통상자원부
    공공연구기관 기술이전 실적 자료 [2015]
  • 사회 network를 고려한 여성과학시술인 만족도 연구
    손소영 산업공학회 31(1), 44-55 [2005]
  • 대학 산학협력단의 기술이전 사업화 인적 구성과 산학협력 성과
    김창완 임의주 조근태 기술혁신연구, 21(2), 115-136 [2013]
  • 기술이전의 효과성 결정요인: 중소기업 기술무상양허사업을 중심으로
    이장재 최형운 한국정책학회보, 7(3), 353-372 [2002]
  • 국가 성과 예측을 위한 연구실 단위 R&D 지식재산관리지표 개발 및 점수산정체계 연구
    손소영 대한산업공학회/한국경영과학회, 춘계 공동학술대회. [2008]
  • 국가 R&D 성과 기술이전의 결정요인에 관한 연구
    박규호 지식재산연구 7(3), 187-215 [2012]
  • 구조방정식모델링
    배병렬 도서출판 청람, 2007 [2007]
  • 구조방정식 모형을 이용한 공공연구기관의 기술사업화 프로세스와 성과분석
    김병근 옥주영 조현정 기술혁신학회지, 14(3), 552-577 [2011]
  • 공공연구기관의 기술이전 효율성 변화와 결정요인
    이성상 지식재산연구 7(3),163-185 [2012]
  • 공공연구기관 기술이전 및 사업화 성공요인 분석
    민재웅 고려대학교 박사학위 논문 [2014]
  • 공공기술이전 사업화 영향요인 및 연구개발 관리전략
    강훈 문혜정 성웅현 기술혁신학회지 18(3), 468-491 [2015]
  • 공공 R&D 이전 기술의 사업화 성공요인 분석 및 성과 제고 방안
    박범수 박지원 윤수진 기술혁신학회지, 18(1), 28-48 [2015]
  • 가산자료 회귀모형을 활용한 연료전지 및 태양전지 분야 특허 질적 수준 결정요인 분석
    박정규 허정은 기술혁신학회지, 13(2), 365-378 [2010]
  • “특허의 질적가치: 우리나라 특허권에 대한 집합적 특성분석을 중심으로”
    성태경 지식재산연구 8(3), 99-120 [2013]
  • “선행기술조사가 국가연구개발사업의 성과에 미치는 영향 : 특허성과를 중심으로”
    박규호 이근 임부루 기술혁신연구, 19(1) [2011]
  • “대학 기술이전의 효율성에 관한 연구”
    한동성 고려대학교 박사학위논문 [2009]
  • “국내 공공연구기관들의 기술이전 효율성 분석”
    김병근 옥주영 기술혁신연구 17(2) [2009]
  • “공공연구기관의 기술이전 활성화 전략”
    이윤준 (과학기술정책연구원) [2008]
  • Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes, 26(73.4), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Whittington, K. B., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2005). Gender and commercial science: Women’s patenting in the life sciences. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(4), 355-370.
  • UNCTAD 1971.
  • Trajtenberg, M. (1990), A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172-187.
  • Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 59-72.
  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2011). Faculty participation in licensing: implications for research. Research Policy, 40(1), 20-29.
  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2005). Gender patterns of research and licensing activity of science and engineering faculty. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(4), 343-353.
  • Stephan, P. E., Gurmu, S., Sumell, A. J., & Black, G. (2007). Who's patenting in the university? Evidence from the survey of doctorate recipients. Econ. Innov. New Techn., 16(2), 71-99.
  • 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, 32(1), 27-48.
  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E. & Link, A. N. (2004), Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: Qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies, Journal of Engineering & Technology Management, 21.
  • Shane, S. (2001), Technological Opportunities and New Firm Creation. Management Science, 47(2), 205-220.
  • Sanoro, M.D,. and Chakrabarti, A.K. (2002), Frim size and technology centrality in industry-university interaction, Research Policy, 31, 1163-1180.
  • Rothaermel, F.T., Agung, S., Jiang, L. (2007), University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change 16, 691–791.
  • Rosenberg, N. (1990), Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?, Research Policy, 19, 165-174.
  • Roessner, David. (2000), "Quantitative and Qualitative Methods and Measures in the Evaluation of Research," Research Evaluation, 9, pp. 125-132
  • Renault, C. S. (2006), Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227-239.
  • Reitzig, M. (2007), How Executives can Enhance IP Strategy and Performance, Sloan Management Review, 49(1), 37-43.
  • Razgaitis, R. (2003). Valuation and pricing of technology-based intellectual property. New York : Wiley.
  • R&D지원정책이 기술성과에 미치는 영향분석
    김찬준(Kim Chan-Jun) 이종일(Lee Johng-Ihl) 기술혁신학회지, 10(1), 1-21 [2007]
  • Powers, J. B. (2003). Commercializing academic research: Resource effects on performance of university technology transfer. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(1), 26-50.
  • Pinto, J. K., Covin, J. G. (1989), Critical Factors in Project Implementation: A comparison of Construction & R&D Projects, Technovation, 32(1),. 31-35.
  • Phan, P.H., Siegel, D.S. (2006), The effectiveness of university technology transfer: lessons learned from qualitative and quantitative research in the US and UK.Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship 2, 66–144.
  • Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Brostr m, A., D'Este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., Kitson, M., Krabel, S., Llerena, P., Lissoni, F., Salter, A., & Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic Engagement and Commercialisation: A Review of the Literature on University-Industry Relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423-442.
  • O’Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34 (7), 994-1009.
  • O’Shea, R., Chugh, H., Allen, T. (2008), Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. Journal of Technology Transfer 33, 653–666.
  • Oster, SM. & Hamermesh, DS. (1998), Aging and productivity among economists, Review of Economics and Statistics, 80.
  • Nunnally, J.C. and Berntein, I.H. (1967), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, INC.
  • Mora-Valentin, E. M., Montoro-Sanchez, A., & Guerras-Martin, L. A. (2004). Determining factors in the success of R&D cooperative agreements between firms and research organizations. Research Policy, 33(1), 17-40.
  • Markman, Gideon D., Phillip H. Phan, David B. Balkin, Peter T. Gianiodis. (2005), "Entrepreneurship and University-based Technology Transfer",Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 241-263.
  • Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1), 110-131.
  • Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2007), An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641-655.
  • Link, A. N. and Siegel, D. S. (2005), Generating Science-Based Growth: An Econometric Analysis of the Impact of Organizational Incentives on University-Industry Technology Transfer, European Journal of Finance, (11),169-182.
  • Lin, Bou-Wen, Chung-Jen Chen, and Hsueh-Liang Wu. (2007), Predicting citations to biotechnology patents based on the information from the patent documents, International Journal of Technology Management, 40(1-3), 87-100
  • Lerner, J., & Wulf, J. (2007), Innovation and incentives: Evidence from corporate R&D. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(4), 634-644.
  • Lee, Yong-Gil, Jeong-Dong Lee, and Yong-Il Song. (2006), An Analysis of citation counts of ETRI-invented US patens, ETRI Journal, 28(4), 541-544.
  • Lanjouw, J.O., A. Pakes, and J. Putnam. (1998), How to count patents and value intellectual property: The uses of patent renewal and application data, Journal of Industrial Eco-nomics, 46(4), 405-432.
  • Lanjouw, J.O. and M. Schankerman. (2001), Charac-teristics of patent litigation: a window on competition, RAND Journal of Economics, 129-151.
  • Lanjouw, J.O. and M. Schankerman. (1997), Stylized facts of patent litigation: value, scope and ownership (No. w6297). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Lanjouw, J. O., and Schankerman, M. 2004. "Patent quality and research productivity: measuring innovation with multiple indicators". The Economic Journal, 114(495): 441-465.
  • Lam, A. (2011), What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘Ribbon’or‘Puzzle’? , Research Policy 40(10): 1354~1368
  • Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2008). Incentives and invention in universities. The RAND Journal of Economics, 39(2), 403-433.
  • Karki, M. M. S. (1997), Patent citation analysis: a policy analysis tool, World Patent Information, 33(4), 269-272.
  • Hastbacka, M. A. (2004), The New Paradigm in US R&D : IP-Driven Product & Technology Development, Technology Management Journal, 1-3.
  • Harhoff, D. Scherer, F. M., and Katrin, V. (2003), citations, Family size, opposition and the value of patent rights, research policy, 32(8), 1343-1363
  • Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg. (2001), The NBER patent citation data file: lessons, insights and methodological tools, NBER Working Paper No. 8498, Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6), 932-950.
  • Giuliani, E., Morrison, A., Pietrobelli, C., & Rabellotti, R. (2010). Who are the researchers that are collaborating with industry? An analysis of the wine sectors in Chile, South Africa and Italy. Research Policy, 39(6), 748-761.
  • Gambardella, A.P. Giuri and A. Luzzi. (2007), The market for patents in Europo, Research Policy, 36(8), 1163-1183.
  • Fung, M. K., and Chow, W. W. (2001), Measuring the intensity of knowledge flow with patent statistics. Economic Letters, 74, 353-358.
  • Fukugawa, N. (2009). Determinants of licensing activities of local public technology centers in Japan. Technovation, 29(12), 885-892.
  • Frietsch, R., Haller, I. Funken-Vrohlings, M., & Grupp, H. (2009). Gender-specific patterns in patenting and publishing. Research Policy, 38(4), 590-599.
  • Friedman, J. & Silberman, J. (2003), University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location matter?, Journal of Technology Transfer, 28.
  • Foltz, J., & Barham, B. & Kim, K. (2000), Universities and Agricultural Biotechnology Patent Production, Agribusiness, 16(1),82-95.
  • Fahrenkreg, G.et al. (2002), RTD Evaluation Toolbox : assessing the socio-economic impact of RTD-polices, Institute for prospective technological studies, European Commission.
  • Fabrizio, K.R., Di Minin, A. (2008), Commercializing the laboratory: faculty patenting and the open science environment. Research Policy 37, 914–931.
  • Everett M. Rogers, Jing Yin, Joern Hoffmann. (2000), Assessing the Effectiveness of Technology Transfer Offices at U.S. Research Universities, The journel of the association of university technology managers,12, 47-80.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L.(2000). The dynamics of innovation: from na tional systems and “Mode2” to a triple helix of university-industry-go vernment relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.
  • Ernst, H. (2003), Patent information for strategic technology management, World Patent Information, 25, 233-242.
  • Dutta, S. and Weiss, A. M.(1997. The relationship between a firm's level of technological innovativeness and its pattern of partnership agreements, Management Science, 43(3), 343-356.
  • Dou, H. and Bai, Y. (2007), “A rapid analysis of Avian Influenza patents in the Esp@cenet database–R&D strategies and country comparisons”, World Patent Information, 29(1), 26-32.
  • Ding, W. W., Murray, F., & Stuart, T. E. (2006). Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences. Science, 313(5787), 665-667.
  • Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?. Research Policy, 32(2), 209-227.
  • Chukumba, C., & Jensen, R. (2005). University invention, entrepreneurship, and start-ups (No. w11475). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Chang, Y. C., Yang, P. Y., & Chen, M. H. (2009). The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6), 936-946.
  • Carlsson B. and Fridh, A. (2002), Technology transfer in United states universities, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12, 199-232.
  • Brown, M.G, Svenson, R.A. (1988), Measuring R&D Prodectivity, Research Technology Management, 31(4), 12.
  • Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., Montobbio, F. (2007), The scientific productivity of academic inventors: new evidence from Italian data. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 16, 101.
  • Bozeman, B. (2000), Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory, Research Policy, 29.
  • Boardman, P. C., & Ponomariov, B. L. (2009). University researchers working with private companies. Technovation, 29(2), 142-153.
  • Boardman, P. C. (2008). Beyond the stars: The impact of affiliation with university biotechnology centers on the industrial involvement of university scientists. Technovation, 28(5), 291–297.
  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2011). The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography. Research Policy, 40(1), 81-93.
  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2004). Academic entrepreneurs: Social learning and participation in university technology transfer. Work in progress.
  • Belenzon, S., & Schankerman, M. (2009). University knowledge transfer: private ownership, incentives, and local development objectives. Journal of Law and Economics, 52(1), 111-144.
  • Baser, O. & Pema, E. (2004), Publications over the academic life cycle: evidence for academic economists, Economic Bulletin, 1.
  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A.(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
  • Azoulay, P., Ding, W., Stuart, T. (2007), The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: demographics or opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 63, 599–623.
  • Azagra-Caro, J.M. (2007), What type of faculty member interacts with what type of firm? Some reasons for the delocalization of university–industry interaction. Technovation, 27(11), 704–715.
  • Allen, S. D., Link, A. N., & Rosenbaum, D. T. (2007). Entrepreneurship and human capital: Evidence of patenting activity from the academic sector. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 31(6), 937-951.
  • Agrawal, A., Henderson, R.M. (2002), Putting patents in context: exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science 48, 44–60.
  • AMOS 16.0 구조방정식모형의 분석
    김계수 한나래출판사 [2007]