Abstract
The Proof of Concept phase in university technology transfer is considered to be critical for the success of both licensing and the creation of spin-off companies. In the United States, Proof of Concept Centers are emerging as successful structures to address the challenges of this phase. In this paper, we present a framework to assess the role for such a structure in a university ecosystem. The framework is built from previous references that we use to explicitly link the features of Proof of Concept Centers with the challenges of the Proof of Concept phase, and establish their specific contributions to the overall technology commercialization efforts of a university. We illustrate the application of this framework in a case study of the University of Coimbra, in Portugal, and develop a characterization that is representative of the role that a Proof of Concept Center can play in comparable university ecosystems that feature conventional technology commercialization structures, and struggle with the challenges of the Proof of Concept phase. Our study suggests that there is in fact a possible role for a Proof of Concept Center in the regional ecosystem of the University of Coimbra, with a potentially very relevant impact in the technology commercialization process, through networking outside academia and research environments, funding of Proof of Concept activities, and technology entrepreneurship education for the development of entrepreneurial skills for researchers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The “Associated Laboratory” status is conferred by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education, to research institutes that collaborate, systematically and efficiently, for specific national science and technology goals.
References
Anderson, T., Daim, T., & Lavoie, F. (2007). Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation, 27(5), 306–318.
Auerswald, P., & Branscomb, L. M. (2003). Valleys of death and Darwinian seas: Financing the invention to innovation transition in the United States. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3–4), 227–239.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
Etzkowitz, H. (2008). Technology commercialization. Presentation to the Max Planck Institute, August 26th.
Franzoni, C., & Lissoni, F. (2006). Academic entrepreneurship, patents, and spin-offs: Critical issues and lessons for Europe. CESPRI working papers 180, CESPRI, Centre for Research on Innovation and Internationalisation, Universitá Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
Gulbranson, C., & Audretsch, D. (2008). Proof of Concept Centers: Accelerating the commercialization of university innovation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 249–258.
Krueger Jr., N., Cummings, B., & Nichols, S. (2008). From bureaucratic tech transfer to entrepreneurial tech commercialization. SSRN eLibrary. Electronic copy available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1288942.
Lerner, J. (2005). The university and the start-up: Lessons from the past two decades. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1–2), 49–56.
Litan, R., Mitchell, L., & Reedy, E. (2007). Commercializing university innovations: Alternative approaches. SSRN eLibrary. Electronic copy available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=976005.
Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981–993.
Marques, J., Caraça, J., & Diz, H. (2006). How can university–industry–government interactions change the innovation scenario in Portugal? The case of the University of Coimbra. Technovation, 26(4), 534–542.
McGrath, R., & Keil, T. (2007). The value captor’s process: Getting the most out of your new business ventures. Harvard Business Review, 85(5), 128–136.
O’Shea, R., Allen, T., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.
Ratinho, T., & Henriques, E. (2010). The role of science parks and business incubators in converging countries: Evidence from Portugal. Technovation, 30(4), 278–290.
Shane, S. (2002). Executive forum: University technology transfer to entrepreneurial companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(6), 537–552.
Siegel, D., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660.
Thursby, J., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 59–72.
Yin, R. (2003a). Applications of case study research. Volume 34 of applied social research methods series (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Yin, R. (2003b). Case study research—Design and methods. Applied social research methods series (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maia, C., Claro, J. The role of a Proof of Concept Center in a university ecosystem: an exploratory study. J Technol Transf 38, 641–650 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9246-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9246-y