출연(연)의 기술이전 사업화 시스템에 대한 사회적 인지 관점에서의 연구. 이를 위해 관련 전문가들의 인터뷰를 바탕으로 그들의 인지모델을 분석하였다. 연구결과 한국의 공공 기술이전 사업화 시스템은 공급과 통제 위주의 선형적 시스템에서 벗어나지 못하고 있는 것으로 나타났다.

1. 출연(연) 기술이전 사업화의 딜레마
- 사회인지 관점 -
28th March, 2019
제6회 기술사업화연구회, 대전 TBC 410호
TAHIR HAMEED, GIRARD SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, USA
PETER VON STADEN, KEDGE BUSINESS SCHOOL, FRANCE
KI-SEOK KWON, HANBAT NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, SOUTH KOREA

2. 차 례
1.연구의 배경과 문제의식
2.문헌검토 : 기술이전사업화, 탈추격, 인지공유
3.연구방법론
4.분석 결과 및 토의
5.결론 : 함의와 향후 연구

3. 1. 연구의 배경
• Key role of public policy in management of R&D, innovation,
technology transfer and commercialization
• Increasing focus at appropriating S&T Knowledge
• Technology transfer and commercialization (TTC)
• Entrepreneurship and start-ups
• Korean innovation system compared to developed countries
• Higher R&D outputs by universities and public research institutes (PRIs)
• Lower rates of successful TTC (regardless of the metrics)

4. • Exponential rise in the number of
journals and patents (Van
Noorden, 2016)
• TTC royalties of Korean
universities - only 5% of that of
major American universities
(KISTI, 2013)
• TTC Returns of Korean R&D
investments hover below 7%
while the returns for many OECD
countries are several points
above 10%
1. 연구의 배경

5. • Traditional TTC approaches in economics, sociology and
management discuss inefficiencies of markets, institutions, finance,
skills and social capital
• Call for contingent and socio-technical approaches (Etzkowitz,1998;
Bozeman, 2000; Martin et al., 2012)
• Almost all TTC studies at national and organizational level
neglecting individuals (Kesting, Kliewe, & Baaken, T. 2014)
• Individuals' agency and actions are not adequately discussed. Early
interviews at CERN hinted towards “un-manageability” of the TTC
process – or a degree of SERENDIPIDITY
1. 연구의 배경

6. • Overarching Research Question
효과적인 기술이전사업화에 있어서
참여자의 인지의 역할은 무엇인가?
1. 연구의 배경 : 문제의식
결론
1. 과학기술정책의 전환과 TTC에서의 사회적 인지
의 역할이 중요
2. 한국의 기술사업화 체제는 선형적 모델에 머물러

7. 2. 문헌검토 : 탈추격 기술이전사업화 정책
• 국가혁신체제(NIS)는 국가 내 지식기반 경제에 의존하는
다양한 학습과 기술역량을 탐구하는 이론적 틀
• 국가혁신체제 내 주체간 효과적 연계를 만들어내는 정책이 중요
• 따라서 기술이전사업화 정책은 중요한 혁신정책의 수단
• 혁신정책은 상향적, 하향적 접근과 이들의 다양한 조합
• 탈추격의 경우, 초기의 하향적 접근에서 상향적 접근으로 진화해야
• 특히, 기술이전 사업화의 경우 시장경쟁적 접근이 중요해짐
• 따라서 정부의 역할도 통제에서 지원하는 주체로 거듭나야

8. 2. 문헌검토 : 국가 수준의 영향요인
• National level factors affecting the effectiveness
of TTC in different policy environments (Bozeman,
2000; Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000; Wright, Clarysse,
Lockett, & Knockaert, 2008; Yusuf, 2008; Kwon, 2011;
Wong, Ho, & Singh, 2007)
• Policy Orientations
• Governmental Programs
• Developmental Stage
• Organizational Contingencies

9. • Organizational Level factors affecting TTC effectiveness
• Strategic mission and regulations
• Leadership styles
• Financial incentives
• Team processes
• Performance management and control
• Knowledge creation and sharing
2. 문헌검토 : 조직수준의 영향요인

10. • TTC performances of nations and organizations are
not similar despite similar structures, institutional and
policy measures
• Traditional institutional and organizational research
• neglects individual’s agency in executing TTC missions/tasks
• assume all actors are rational behaving similarly
• do not account for bounded rationality and learning
2. 문헌검토 : 기존 문헌의 갭

11. 2. 문헌검토 : 기술이전사업화 기존선형모델
그림. 기술이전사업화의 기존 선형모델 (Linear Model)
새로운 견해 : 기술이전 사업화의 다양한 행위자들이 여러
단계에서 복잡하게 상호작용. 특히, ‘이전’을 단순한 전달
아닌 개인간 학습과 상당기간 교환의 과정으로 이해

12. • FRAMES/ MENTAL MODELS/ SCHEMATAS
• Interpret the world and construct their own social realities (Neisser, 1979;
Inhelder, Piaget, Parsons, & Milgram, 1958; Davidson, 2002)
• 외부자극(정책, external environments)과 산출물(기술사업화 정책의
실행, behavior)을 연결(mediate)
• 인지공유모델 (팀인지모델) : 팀원들이 이해하는 특정 이슈의 이해,
반응, 결과의 결합체. 팀간 인지모델의 공유도가 높으면 성과 높아.
2. 문헌검토 : 개인의 사회적 인지, 프레임
그림. 팀간 공유도 차이

13. • Defining the TTC FRAME (SCHEMATA) of
individual actors involved in the TTC process
- Assumptions, knowledge, and expectations the
actors employ to interpret and manage the TTC
process, its consequences and effectiveness
2. 문헌검토 : 개인의 사회적 인지, 프레임

14. *연구문제 도출
• What role individual actors’ cognition play in
effective TTC (from the South Korean Universities and PRIs to
the markets)?
- What differences and commonalities can be
observed in the cognition (frames) of different actors
involved in the TTC process?
- What, if any, are inter-relationships between the
cognitive differences of individuals, their actions and
inefficiencies in the TTC process?

15. 3. 연구방법론
• In-depth semi-structured interviews with TTC actors from public R&D
organizations in South Korea
• Each type of actor (i.e. Producer, Intermediary, Recipient) interviewed
• Transcriptions (some translations as well)
• Coding for key elements of TTC frames - RQDA on top of R software
• Thematic analysis (Braun and Clark, 2006) - code frequency
• Identification of commonalities and differences within and between
the FRAMES of different actors
• Analyzing/identifying cognitive conflicts in elements of the FRAMES

16. 3. 연구방법론

17. 3. 연구방법론

18. 4. 분석 및 결과 토의
• Two major types of FRAMES
• Managed: TTC actors strongly perceived that TTC
process is manageable through a well-defined
process and good coordination
• Emergent: TTC actors generally perceived several
aspects of the TTC process are not automatic, linear
or rationally manageable but emergent in a context

19. • Several different types of cognitive conflicts
• STRATEGIC – Goal conflicts at project/role level
• TASK - Operational conflicts
• INTER-PERSONAL – Goal/Emotion conflicts at personal level
• Analysis also revealed two types of incongruence (high degree of
cognitive conflicts)
• Conflicts between actors with DIFFERENT FRAMES (다음 표 상하)
• Conflicts between actors having SAME FRAMES (다음 표 좌우)
4. 분석 및 결과 토의

20. 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Type of TTC Actors Key Elements TTC FRAMES
Managed Emergent
Technology Producer
(Universities, Public
Research Institutions,
Corporate R&D Labs.,
Individuals)
Role of Government/Policy Controller or Fixer Participant
Commercialization
Opportunities/Goals
Limited ( unnecessarily by policy or mission)
Exploratory, often not defined in
the mission, current metrics inapt
Process-Tasks
Somewhat defined and straightforward, TTC part
of regular innovation process (not very distinct
tasks), better to follow than adapt
Organizational Culture Fewer long-lasting relationships and channels Short-Termism,
Personal Roles and Rewards
Well-defined roles but interventions, Rewards
deterministic but favourable
Like to make money
Personal ethos and emotions Affective, Professional Identity, Like stability Risk-Taker,
Technology Intermediary
Government Officers,
Technology Licensing Offices
(TLOs), Science Parks,
Independent Technology
Brokers, Technology
Assessors, VCs, Public
Funds, Incubators
Role of Government/Policy Controller or Fixer
Commercialization
Opportunities/Goals
Limited (by mission, technology and
stakeholders), little interest/understanding on
demand side, little willingness on supply side
Process-Tasks
TTC is distinct. Boundary-spanning between TP
and TR. Direct support (well-defined) projects
better than indirect. Inapt metrics. Paperwork
Organizational Culture
Bureaucratic, short tenures especially gov. (low
commitment to strategic mission)
Personal Roles and Rewards
Well-defined roles with rigid boundaries;
Rewards deterministic and unfair
Personal ethos and emotions
Low self-esteem, Seek recognition/rewards, self-
centred
Technology Recipients
(Licensees - Businesses,
Corporations, Spin-offs,
Start-ups), Collaborators
(Joint Ventures, R&D
projects)
Role of Government/Policy Responsible for Development, Resource Provider Facilitator
Commercialization
Opportunities/Goals
Somewhat limited by policy or mission, industry
and problems requiring solutions
Market defined
Process-Tasks Well-defined, Over-complex, Supply-pushed
Defined but implemented much
like gambling than linearly
Organizational Culture
Dependency-based relationships and
communications
Pro-active communications and
social networks
Personal Roles and Rewards Technical people need push to engage deeply, Find opportunities
Personal ethos and emotions Motivated towards value-creation, Like change Opportunism, Risk-Taking

21. 4. 분석 및 결과 토의 : 과학기술자

22. 4. 분석 및 결과 토의 : 기술이전 담당자

23. 4. 분석 및 결과 토의 : 기업 및 기술수혜자

24. 4. 분석 및 결과 토의 : 공무원

25. 4. 분석 및 결과 토의 : 종합 비교

26. 5. 결론 : 함의
• 선진 국가혁신체체로의 전환에 요소 투입보다는
사회인지적 요소가 중요 (특히, 기술이전사업화의
성과는 주체들의 인지에 따른 상호작용이 중요).
• 한국은 TTC Linear Model 포획 /반면 새로운 모드도 등장 :
기술이전사업화의 공유인지모델에 있어서, 기술의
선택과 개발이나 사업화 과정에는 동의도(Congluence)가
높지만, 보상이나 사업화 기술의 활용에는 불일치
• 정책전환을 위해 모험적이면서 도적적인 자유도 높은
정책실험 필요. TTC 고객들의 의견을 강하게 반영.
• 과학기술정책 결정과정에 앞으로는 다양한 참여자의
사회적 인지를 고려

27. 5. 결론 : 함의
• Policy and management implications
• A degree of bottom-up policy, strategic planning and organizational
execution of technology projects would also be required to increase
the overall effectiveness of TTC
• Decisions on roles and rewards should be revisited in medium-term
with participation from all types of actors/stakeholders
• Professional training and awareness about
• identification of conflicts, conflict-resolution and conflict-
promotion strategies
• Self-awareness, self-efficacy and self-regulation
• Also considering open and participatory TTC processes/tasks (e.g.
those suitable for open innovation processes e.g. co-creation)

28. 5. 결론 : 함의

29. 5. 결론 : 함의

30. 5. 결론 : 향후 연구
• Our research plans
• On-going interviews in South Korea and EU
• Plan to compare EU and Korean TTC
• Data collection from several different actors from the same
project/organization (therefore incorporating organizational
frames, interactions and effectiveness of TTC)
• Robust theoretical viewpoints on cognitive conflicts should
be employed to explain their resolution or promotion
• For example, social exchange, cognitive transactions, social
judgement, learning & development and knowledge-sharing

31. THANK YOU!
“Luck is what happens when
opportunity meets preparation”.
Anonymous

32. DEFINITION: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND
COMMERCIALIZATION (TTC) PROCESS
• Technology transfer: Movement of know-how, technical knowledge, or
technology from one organizational setting to another (Bozeman, 2000)
• Process of transferring scientific and technical knowledge from one individual
or organization to another for economic advantage —generally for the
purpose of commercializing that knowledge (Sheft, 2008)
• Technology commercialization: Successful appropriation of the transferred
technology (sales/revenues, adoption, ROI)
R&D and
Disclosure
Evaluation/
Opportunity
Recognition
Protection/
Patenting
Marketing
Licensing/
Venture/
Project
Scientists,
Technologists
Technology Licensing
Organizations (TLOs)/
Gov.
TLOs,
Scientists
TLOs,
Intermediaries
Businesses,
TLOs,
Intermediaries
TLO: Technology Licensing Office/Officer

33. DEFINITION: CATEGORIES OF TTC ACTORS
• Technology Producers
• Universities, Public Research Institutions (PRIs), Corporate R&D Labs.,
Individuals
• Technology Intermediaries
• Government Officers, Technology Licensing Offices (TLOs), Science Parks,
Independent Technology Scouts/Brokers, Technology Assessors, VCs, Public
Funds, Incubators
• Technology Recipients
• Licensees (Businesses/Corporations, Spin-offs, Start-ups)
• Collaborators (Joint Ventures, R&D projects)