Royalty Sharing and Technology Licensing in Universities

By S. Lach, Mark Schankerman. 2004

210 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/646149c7431c0c63dd11da39ae35818ea8ef66ac

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Industry Funding of University Research and Scientific Productivity (2011, unknown): “…Thursby and Thursby 2002; Azoulay et al. 2009; Czarnitzki et al. 2009), academic entrepreneurship (e.g. Ding and Stuart 2006, Toole and Czarnitzki 2010) and the engagement in contract research (e.g. Lach and Schankerman 2004; Carayol 2007) and collaborative research (e.g. Zucker et al. 2002).”
Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink? (2015, unknown): “Although the importance of pecuniary incentives for faculty members has been examined (e.g., royalty distribution formulas-see Lach and Schankerman, 2004); Link and Siegel, 2005), there has been no systematic analysis of the role of changes in promotion and tenure policies on the propensity of…”
Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany (2010, background): “In fact, simply increasing the returns to faculty members seems to make the commercialization process more effective (Friedman and Silberman 2003; Lach and Schankerman 2004; Link and Siegel 2005).”
An Empirical Analysis of the Propensity of Academics to Engage in Informal University Technology Transfer (2007, background): “industry scientists, and perhaps, university administrators, TTO directors, and managers/entrepreneurs (Powell, 1990; Liebeskind et al., 1996). Social networks that allow knowledge transfer appear to work in both directions. Scientists who were interviewed noted that interacting with industry enable”
The Impact of Academic Patenting on the Rate, Quality and Direction of (Public) Research Output (2009, methodology): “Fourth, we match the royalty rate data from Lach 22 and Schankerman (2004) with the research institutions represented in our sample.12 If the scientific labor market sorts scientists with similar entrepreneurial proclivities in the same institutions, then the royalty rate will be a valid proxy for…”
WHO'S PATENTING IN THE UNIVERSITY? EVIDENCE FROM THE SURVEY OF DOCTORATE RECIPIENTS (2007, background): “…© 2007 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/10438590600982806 72 P. E. STEPHAN et al. and Thursby, 2002; 2004; Geuna and Nesta, 2003; Siegel et al., 2003; Lach and Schankerman, 2004; Murray and Stern, 2005).1 These studies provide important insight into institutional factors that relate to patent…”
Us Faculty Patenting: Inside and Outside the University (2007, unknown): “If, as in Jensen and Thursby (2001) and Lach and Schankerman (2004) faculty respond to financial incentives associated with licensing, faculty would be more likely to disclose inventions to the university the higher is their share of any revenue the university earns from licensing those inventions.”
The strategic orientation of universities in knowledge transfer activities (2019, background): “TTO size is a measure of its experience, therefore we expect that it is positively linked to TTO income-related outputs (Lach and Schankerman, 2004; Siegel et al. 2003; Friedman and Silberman, 2003).”