U.S. Universities and Technology Transfer

Richard G. Hamermesh; Josh   Lerner; Phillip  Andrews

Background Note | HBS Case Collection | August 2011 (Revised September 2011)

U.S. Universities and Technology Transfer

by Richard G. Hamermesh, Josh Lerner and Phillip Andrews

Abstract

Technology transfer from U.S. universities to industry has increased dramatically in the last 25 years. Reviews the history of technology transfer with particular emphasis on the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. It then examines how universities responded to Bayh-Dole, the growth of technology transfer offices, and compares how three different universities (MIT, Stanford, and Harvard) approach technology transfer. Provides an overview of the technology transfer process and issues around current practices.

Keywords: Higher Education; Technology; Laws and Statutes; Education Industry; Technology Industry; United States;

Format: Print

33 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Hamermesh, Richard G., Josh Lerner, and Phillip Andrews. "U.S. Universities and Technology Transfer." Harvard Business School Background Note 812-016, August 2011. (Revised September 2011.)

There has never been a greater need for long-term investments. And it is increasingly unlikely that the public sector will be willing or able to fill the gap. Those best positioned to address the long-run needs are likely to be the pools of capital in the hands of pensions, insurers, sovereign wealth funds, endowments, and families. In addition to their long time frames, these institutions command enormous sums. Yet, in many cases, despite the abundance of capital and substantial need for returns, long-term investments have been problematic at best. Building on recent academic research, our own work, and many discussions with practitioners, this book outlines the key challenges facing long-term investments and suggests ways to address them. Over the past several decades, “private equity” has been the primary way in which longer-term illiquid investments have been made. In dissecting the motivations and actions of the key actors in the world of long-run investing, we have taken a careful look at traditional fund models, but we also analyzed other ways to pursue concentrated and long-term investments.

Do private equity firms contribute to financial fragility during economic crises? We find that during the 2008 financial crisis, PE-backed companies increased investments relative to their peers, while also experiencing greater equity and debt inflows. The effects are stronger among financially constrained companies and those whose private equity investors had more resources at the onset of the crisis. PE-backed companies consequentially experienced higher asset growth and increased market share during the crisis.

Faculty & Research

U.S. Universities and Technology Transfer

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors