Technology transfer and absorption : an ' R & D value - mapping ' approach to evaluation 1

Evaluating technology transfer outcomes from government supported research, development and demonstration (RD&D) projects is complicated by the variety of paths through which technology can move from producer(s) to user(s). Using a set of 31 cases studies of R D & D projects the processes of technology transfer and 'technology absorption' are examined. Technology transfer is the use by a party external to the project of the technology or technical information outputs. Technology absorption is defined as the use by contractors, sub-contractors or co-sponsors participating in the R D & D project. This is a rarely studied phenomenon but one especially important for technology policies. The case analysis confirmed the value of viewing transfer and absorption as separate processes with separate determinants. Absorption is a more robust process stimulated by a variety of factors. Transfer is more delicate, thwarted not only by market barriers, but also coordination problems, conflicts, and resource constrains among project members. Using models of the transfer and absorption processes a typology of transfer outcomes is created. 'On-the-shelf' projects (12 cases) were those in which no transfer or absorption impacts occurred. These projects involved large numbers of actors assisting a small private producer/contractor who was dependent upon outside resources for completing the project. While a surprising amount effort was made to transfer these outcomes the efforts failed. 'Absorption' projects (eight cases) were those in which technology was absorbed but not transferred. Absorption occurred both by design and by default. 'Market-induced' projects (four cases) were those were technology was transferred but not absorbed. These cases also involved small private producers but they experienced less project interdependence and were marketing to niches created * Corresponding author. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the New York State Energy Research and Development authority under contract #1573-ERER-IHR-91. Several NYSERDA officials provided information and insights used in this analysis; among those who were particularly generous in their assistance are Irvin White (formerly President of the Authority), William Valentino (current Presiden0, and program managers James Cole, Brad Holloman, and Jeffrey Petersen. The opinions expressed here are, however, solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect opinions of the Authority. We are also grateful to our colleagues who performed the case studies that were the grist for this analysis. Case study authors included (in addition to the authors of this paper) Smart Bretschneider, Carole Cimitile, Larry Kinney, Julia Melkers, Walter Meyer, and Maria Papadakis. Monica Ganghan provided valuable assistance in editing and analyzing the case studies. 0048-7333/96/$15.00 Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII S0048-7333(96)00890-6 968 G. Kingsley et a l . / Research Policy 25 (1996) 967-995 through public regulation, 'Contractor and sponsor-induced' projects (seven cases) were those where absorption and transfer occurred. In most cases absorption was a springboard for transfer activities.