An Exploratory Study of the Role and Contribution of University Knowledge Transfer Offices (KTOs) in Knowledge Transfer and Value Creation

Developed European countries place emphasis on innovation as an important growth driver. Higher educational institutions, within these developed countries, actively participate in regional economic initiatives to proactively transfer and commercialise knowledge to business and society. This knowledge transfer is now performed in a more direct way than heretofore and the commercialization remit is now regarded as the Universities 3rd mission. This is in addition to its traditional remits of education and research. This study explores the effectiveness of the University knowledge transfer process and the contribution that knowledge transfer offices play in knowledge transfer and commercialisation (Value creation). This study uses exploratory in-depth interviews of selected knowledge transfer professionals across the EEA (European Economic Area) to identify the perceived value contributing aspects of the knowledge transfer process and also to evaluate the role and contribution of the Knowledge Transfer office itself in that process.The research finds that: Research institutions in the EEA have between 10 and 25 years in knowledge and technology transfer utilising a systematic approach through a KTO system. The research suggests that the time is appropriate for Universities to recognise knowledge transfer as a ‘mission critical’ activity (3rd mission) in their wider societal remit and that they should therefore prioritise funding for these activities accordingly. Evidence so far suggests that this 3rd mission has yet to achieve’ parity of esteem’ within Universities. The more successful KTOs perform important boundary–spanning roles for the University by marketing the knowledge production skills and abilities in their HEI whilst establishing deep links with indigenous industry and also by attracting multinational clients and projects. This requires the leadership and staff in successful KTOs to possess high levels of cognitive, contextual and organisational ambidexterity. Although difficult, there is also a need to develop appropriate transnational evaluative measures of the output, outcomes and impact for University knowledge transfer processes in the short, medium and long term. Theory–based evaluation utilising a balanced scorecard of evaluative measures (Hard & Soft, Short & Long term) is a methodological approach which can help policymakers and University management to obtain a ‘true and fair’ view of the contribution of the knowledge transfer process to value creation