This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Agrawal, A. Articles by Henderson, R. Search for Related Content

Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT

Queen's School of Business, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6
Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
aagrawal{at}business.queensu.ca
rhenders{at}mit.edu

In this paper we explore the degree to which patents are representative of the magnitude, direction, and impact of the knowledge spilling out of the university by focusing on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and in particular, on the Departments of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. Drawing on both qualitative and quantitative data, we show that patenting is a minority activity: a majority of the faculty in our sample never patent, and publication rates far outstrip patenting rates. Most faculty members estimate that patents account for less than 10% of the knowledge that transfers from their labs. Our results also suggest that in two important ways patenting is not representative of the patterns of knowledge generation and transfer from MIT: patent volume does not predict publication volume, and those firms that cite MIT papers are in general not the same firms as those that cite MIT patents. However, patent volume is positively correlated with paper citations, suggesting that patent counts may be reasonable measures of research impact. We close by speculating on the implications of our results for the difficult but important question of whether, in this setting, patenting acts as a substitute or a complement to the process of fundamental research.

Key Words: Patents; University Science; Knowledge Transfer; Technology Transfer
History: Received: December 1, 2000;

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. A. Toole and D. Czarnitzki Exploring the Relationship Between Scientist Human Capital and Firm Performance: The Case of Biomedical Academic Entrepreneurs in the SBIR Program Management Science, January 1, 2009; 55(1): 101 - 114. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Bercovitz and M. Feldman Academic Entrepreneurs: Organizational Change at the Individual Level Organization Science, January 1, 2008; 19(1): 69 - 89. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Metlay Reconsidering Renormalization: Stability and Change in 20th-Century Views on University Patents Social Studies of Science, August 1, 2006; 36(4): 565 - 597. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Giovanni. Gavetti and D. A. Levinthal 50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration Management Science, October 1, 2004; 50(10): 1309 - 1318. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Feller Virtuous and Vicious Cycles in the Contributions of Public Research Universities to State Economic Development Objectives Economic Development Quarterly, May 1, 2004; 18(2): 138 - 150. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. E. Stephan, A. J. Sumell, G. C. Black, and J. D. Adams Doctoral Education and Economic Development: The Flow of New Ph.D.s to Industry Economic Development Quarterly, May 1, 2004; 18(2): 151 - 167. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. A. Shane and K. T. Ulrich 50th Anniversary Article: Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science Management Science, February 1, 2004; 50(2): 133 - 144. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Olk and T. L. Griffith Creating and Disseminating Knowledge Among Organizational Scholars: The Role of Special Issues Organization Science, January 1, 2004; 15(1): 120 - 129. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Nicolaou and S. Birley Social Networks in Organizational Emergence: The University Spinout Phenomenon Management Science, December 1, 2003; 49(12): 1702 - 1725. [Abstract] [PDF]