| Summary: | Engineering education pushes the creation of new technology to solve community problems. The process of technology transfer promotes educational innovation in universities, a vital process that can improve citizens’ quality of life in cities and rural communities. As a result, university technology transfer offices (TTOs) have to create strategies that motivate students and researchers to generate technology. Thus, a primary challenge that TTOs face is to know and communicate the income potential compared to their much more predictable and limited expense budgets. Institutional budgeting for a TTO’s growth would be simplified if the office were on a solid financial footing, i.e., breaking even or making a financial return. Many offices assume that income is unpredictable, that it is a lottery, luck, and more stakes in the fire improve the odds of hitting a winner, etc. These common assumptions or beliefs provide only a vague insight into how to move an intellectual property (IP) portfolio strategy forward. How can a TTO be assessed for quantitative value and not just be a cost center adding qualitative value? This paper illustrates the first steps to understanding how to project potential income versus a much more predictable expense budget, which would allow universities to improve their technology transfer strategy and results. As a result, TTOs would operate under a more sustainable IP portfolio strategy, promote educational innovation in universities, and generate a more significant community impact.
|
|---|