This study analyzes the effects of government support and universities’ administrative and managerial capabilities on university technology transfer performance, within an economic and social environment that increasingly emphasizes the ‘entrepren...
This study analyzes the effects of government support and universities’ administrative and managerial capabilities on university technology transfer performance, within an economic and social environment that increasingly emphasizes the ‘entrepreneurial role’ of universities. In addition, it examines whether the operational capability of university technology holdings moderates these effects. Existing research on university technology transfer has predominantly focused on Technology Licensing Office(TLO), offering relatively limited discussion on the roles of government and the diverse capabilities required throughout universities’ research and industry–university collaboration processes. In particular, studies addressing the operational capacity of technology holdings—established by many universities since 2008 to enhance the efficiency of technology transfer and commercialization—remain scarce. Accordingly, this study investigates the direct effects of government support and universities’ administrative and managerial capabilities on technology transfer performance, as well as the moderating role of universities’ capability to operate technology holdings. Using 2023 data from 130 universities, multiple regression analysis and moderation analysis were conducted. Technology transfer performance was set as the dependent variable. The independent variables were categorized into government support and university administrative–managerial capabilities: government support was operationalized as the scale of government research funding; university capabilities were represented by research-oriented university status, research performance of full-time faculty, number of full-time faculty with industry experience, and number of patent applications, thereby encompassing both research and industry–university cooperation aspects. The moderating variable was defined as the operational capability of technology holdings. The data used in the analysis were obtained from publicly available sources such as the ‘Academyinfo’ and the ‘University–Industry Cooperation Survey’. The findings from hypothesis testing are as follows.
First, the scale of government research funding had a positive effect on university technology transfer performance. Consistent with previous studies and national data demonstrating universities’ strong dependence on government research funding, the results confirm that government support meaningfully contributes to the production of high-quality research outcomes. Beyond simple financial support, government funding plays a crucial role in expanding research infrastructure within universities and fostering long-term research environments through joint research and network building with external firms, research institutes, and other universities.
Second, among the administrative–managerial capabilities of universities, research-oriented university status and the number of patent applications positively affected technology transfer performance, whereas research productivity of full-time faculty and the number of full-time faculty with industry experience did not show significant effects. This suggests that universities’ organizational and technology management capabilities are critical determinants of technology transfer performance. Operating a research-oriented system that encourages graduate study tends to increase the participation of high-performing students in research, thereby contributing to the creation of high-quality research outputs. Moreover, transforming such outputs into technologies that align with industry needs and filing them as patents serves as an essential foundation for technology transfer and commercialization.
Third, the operational capability of technology holdings exhibited a significant moderating effect only on the relationship between patent applications and technology transfer performance, and the direction of the effect was negative—contrary to expectations. This appears to stem from the generally insufficient operational capability of technology holdings as of 2023, except for a small group of top-tier universities. Many universities have not yet established a technology holding company, and even among those that have, only a limited number have generated meaningful profits through the establishment or acquisition of subsidiaries.
Overall, government support and universities’ internal capabilities were found to exert positive effects on technology transfer performance. This indicates that, compared to advanced countries such as the United States, Korean universities—whose technology transfer is still developing both quantitatively and qualitatively—require continuous governmental support alongside efforts to strengthen their internal capabilities. Furthermore, activating technology holdings may help universities reduce the ‘transaction costs’ associated with technology transfer and commercialization, thereby enhancing performance.
keywords : university technology transfer performance, government support, university capabilities, technology holdings, moderation analysis
Student Number : 2024-23387