HBCUS TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
By Dr. Clovia Hamilton, Assistant Professor Department of Technology and Society
SUNY KOREA in affiliation with Stonybrook University
Tech Transfer Experience
Former USPTO Patent Examiner
Registered Patent Attorney
Technology Transfer Specialist US EPA National Vehicle Fuel Emissions Lab
Technology Transfer Specialist University of Illinois Champaign - Engineering Patent Portfolio
Director of Intellectual Property and Research Compliance at Old Dominion University
Lemongrass Consulting for 10 years
Dr. Clovia Hamilton
BS University of IL Champaign – Engineering
JD Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School
LLM University of IL Champaign – LLM Intellectual Property Law
MBA Wesleyan College
PhD University of TN Knoxville Industrial & Systems Engineering
Tuskegee
Study Motivation: HBCU Pride
Study Motivation:
Dr. Rose Glee, passed in 2014
PhD Chemistry, Univ of Wisconsin
FAMU Pharmaceuticals
FAMU Technology Transfer Director
We met at AUTM
Contract for a Tech Transfer Strategic Planning Session
This is in dedication to Dr. Rose Glee!
HBCUs: Historical Background
Background
American Slavery - 1619 to 1865 (Juan Williams, 2004)
Background
American Civil War – 1861 to 1865
4.4 Million slaves were freed
Background
Reconstruction - 1865 to 1877
4.4 Million freed Slaves needed to be educated (Williams, 2010)
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) were founded
Government assistance from Freedmen’s Bureau (Juan Williams, 2004)
Charity from the American Missionary Association (AMA)
Charity from Industrial philanthropists
What does this have to do with Industrial Engineering?
Industrial philanthropists wanted a say in how the former slave laborers would be educated (Juan Williams, 2004)
Investor George Peabody (1867 Peabody Fund) sold cotton & other commodities; and banking
Textile tycoon John Slater (1882 Slater Fund); his brother Sam Slater, Father of the Industrial Revolution
John D. Rockefeller (
1902 General Education Board (GEB)),Standard Oil Company
Sewing machine tycoon Thomas White
Sears Roebuck’s Julius Rosenwald
Industrial operations needed labor
Background
Education of Freed Slaves in HBCUs
First HBCUs: Lincoln University (1854, PA) & Cheney University (1837, PA)
Einstein at Lincoln University
HBCUs Today
Today, the White House Initiative on HBCUs uses the
US Higher Education Act of 1965’s definition of HBCUs which is:
“…any historically black college or university that was established prior to 1964, whose principal mission was, and is, the education of black
Americans, and that is accredited by a nationally recognized
accrediting agency or association determined by the Secretary [of
Education] to be a reliable authority as to the quality of training offered
or is, according to such an agency or association, making reasonable
progress toward accreditation.”
HBCUs Today
101 HBCUs
Title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 schools provides US government institutional aid to HBCUs
So, HBCUs are called
“Title III universities”
Research Problem
Research Problem
HBCU leaders complain of having financial woes (Jones, 2013)
HBCUs were not founded with a research focus, but rather vocational trade
Instructors were paid less than half Whites and classes 60+ … no incentive to do research (Butchart, 1988)
Land grant schools got agricultural experiment stations, but with the exception of George Washington Carver’s funding, for 50 years HBCUs were excluded (Kujovich, 1993)
Educated Blacks were viewed as a liability to sharecropping
Spelman began research in 1930s and then there was the Great Depression
Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton’s administrations increased funding - - lead to dependence
Research Problem
HBCUs still rely heavily on government assistance &
have difficulty becoming more financially self reliant (Williams, 2010)
Few HBCUs engage in research that results in inventions and technology transfer to generate licensing revenue income (Williams, 2014)
Nearly all of the 24 HBCUs with Carnegie Doctoral classification are emerging research institutions (ERIs)& desire to learn more about tech transfer
90.9% are ERIs with <$20M in federal R&D funding
Research at HBCUs
Research at HBCUs
• 900 Black female STEM faculty comprised less than 2% of the US faculty and 22% at HBCUs (Mack, 2011)
• HBCUs graduate 60% of America’s black engineering students and the heaviest concentration of black female STEM
professors is at HBCUs.
• Black female STEM professors nurture, mentor and influence Black students in STEM fields (Mack, 2011; Nelson, 2010).
• HBCUs graduate 60% of America’s black engineering students
(Bagley, 2013)
Leveling the Playing Field requires Tools Dr. Hamilton’s PhD Research Questions
With respect to advancing the participation of HBCUs in university tech commercialization as a source of revenue, the research questions
include:
1. Given that the problems that non-HBCUs face with university
technology transfer will likely be equally or more challenging for HBCUs, what are the problem areas with non-HBCUs’ university technology
transfer?
2. What theoretical framework for research can be used to develop
advanced planning system tools to help HBCUs with technology transfer?
3. What advanced planning system tools should be developed and used
by HBCUs to alleviate the university technology transfer problems?
Mixed Method
Exploratory Study
American Universities
Non
Title III Universities
Title III
Universities HBCUs UniversitiesDoctoral OSRs TTOs
Non Title III Universities
Similar to HBCUs TTOs OSRs UniversitiesDoctoral
Theoretical Framework:
Integration & Triangulation
Resource Based View (Barney, 1991)
Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954)
Theory of Distribution Management (Forrester, 1958)
Paradigm Effects Theory (Kuhn, 1962; Barker, 1992)
Theoretical Framework:
Integration & Triangulation
Theory Integration
We join 2 or more theories because the integrated theories work more effectively than any one in
explaining the phenomenon
Theory Triangulation
We analyze data from more than one perspective
Integrated & Triangulated
Theoretical Framework for the Research
Theoretical frameworks provide a structure to support explanations for why research problems exist.
The problem here is that there is a lack of HBCU engagement in tech transfer.
Social Comparison Theory + Resource Based View +
Theory of Distribution Management +
Paradigm Effects Theory
Social Comparison Theory
Theory of Distribution Management
Paradigm Effect Theory
Resource Based View
Groups gain
accuracy & clarity about their opinions
& abilities by comparing themselves to others in similar proximity & with similar abilities.
If resources are so unique and not easy to copy, then they are sources of competitive
advantage - - resources such as patents or
scientific expertise
Systems dynamics is the process of combining the theory, method, and philosophy required to analyze the behavior of a system to provide a common foundation.
Because organizations are so
intertwined, system dynamics influence product research, engineering, sales and promotions.
It is difficult to notice the need to shift when the existing paradigm is strong (e.g. the HBCU teaching orientation). So, leaders need to learn how to engage in strategic exploration to anticipate the future better
Resource Based View &
Theory of Distribution
Management
Social Comparison Theory
& Paradigm Shift Effects Theory
Paradigm shifts effects:
It’s difficult to notice the need to shift when an existing
paradigm is strong
Social Comparison Theory
1. Groups gain accuracy & clarity about their opinions of
themselves and their abilities by comparing themselves to others that are in:
Similar physical proximity
(same states) Have similar abilities
(lower quartile in licensing, closely matching student enrollment) (Festinger, 1954; Greenberg & Ashkanasy, 2007; Suls & Wheeler, 2000)Social Comparison Theory
2. The need for comparisons to similar others leads to:
affiliation,
pressure toward uniformity,
an unidirectional drive upward, and
competition.
Social Comparison Theory
3. If HBCUs believe that non-HBCUs are performing better, then they’ll make upward comparisons
If HBCUs believe that their abilities and efforts do not meet up
to non-HBCUs, they may be motivated to make improvements
(Buunk, 2007)
Create list of Doctoral HBCUs
Doctoral HBCUs
1. AL A&M (AL) 2. AL State (AL)
3. Bowie State (MD) 4. Clark Atlanta (GA) 5. Delaware State (DE) 6. Fayetteville State (NC) 7. Florida A&M (FL)
8. Grambling (LA) 9. Hampton (VA) 10. Howard (DC)
11. Jackson State (MS)
12. Meharry Medical College (TN)
Doctoral HBCUs
13. Morehouse Medical College (GA) 14. Morgan State (MD)
15. NC A&T (NC)
16. Norfolk State (VA) 17. Prairie View (TX) 18. SC State (SC)
19. Southern University Baton Rouge (LA) 20. TN State (TN)
21. TX Southern (TX)
22. Tuskegee University (AL)
23. University of Maryland Eastern Shore (MD)
24. Virginia State (VA)
Created a list of non-HBCUs for HBCUs to compare themselves to - Similar proximity
- Similar abilities
Non-HBCUs
① Georgia Regents (GA)
② Medical Univ of South Carolina (SC)
③ Baylor College (TX)
④ Univ of North Texas Health Center (TX)
⑤ Eastern Virginia Medical School (VA)
⑥ Louisiana Tech (LA)
⑦ Wake Forest (NC)
⑧ Univ of AL Huntsville (AL)
⑨ Rice University (TX)
Data collection
AUTM STATT licensing survey data, 2010-2014
USPTO patent database
US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
US Bureau of Labor
National Academies of Sciences’ National Research Council (NRC)’s faculty quality survey
NSF Academic Research and Development Expenditures
Data was used to develop an
Advanced Planning System Toolkit
University Tech Transfer Problems
Identified in the
Literature Review
Proposed Tools
① Need for Benchmarks
Benchmarking Tool Development:
Create a set of benchmarks based on non-HBCUs selected using application of Social Comparison Theory & RBV lessons
② Need for Budget Resource Planning
Budget Resource Planning Tool Development:
Use of Linear Programming Optimization & novel view that university tech transfer is a supply chain network
③ Need for Job Scheduling
Job Scheduling Tool Development:
Use of Simulated Annealing Advanced Optimization for university tech transfer job task scheduling
④ Need for a Model IP Policy
Model IP Policy Tool Development:
Use of the literature review, website searches & correlations to draft a model university IP policy
Conclusion
Problem areas
They do not have the research funds to supply a tech transfer supply
chain network
Solutions
Increasing research funding needs to be the HBCU’s top no. 1 priority
Then, they need to plan to thwart university tech transfer problems that are common among non-HBCUs
Need for Benchmarks
Need for Budget resource
planning
Need to prevent Job Delays
Need for improve IP policies
Hamilton’s 4 Tools:
So far, 3 papers, 2 Tools are published in journals
Hamilton, C. (2019). Novel Job Scheduling Tool for University Technology Transfer, Applied Management Journal, 2020.
Hamilton, C. (2017). HBCU Technology Transfer Supply Chain Networks’
Sustainability: Budget Resource Planning Tool Development, In Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Management (ASEM) International Annual
Conference (IAC), Reimagining Systems Engineering and Management, Huntsville AL, p 117-127.
Hamilton, C. (2017). Emerging Research Institutions’ Technology Transfer Supply Chain Networks’ Sustainability: Budget Resource Planning Tool Development.
IEEE Engineering Management Review, 45 (4): 39-52.
Hamilton’s 5 paper Dissertation:
1 paper is recently accepted Model IP Policy
Hamilton, C. Increasing Diversity Among Women Entrepreneurs in High Growth High Tech using HBCU Female Academic
Entrepreneurs, Applied Management Journal, forthcoming 2021.
Was presented in 2017 at the Diana Conference for research on female entrepreneurs at the Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City
Will be presented at the International Association of Applied
Management (IAAM) in January 2021 virtually
Hamilton’s 5 paper Dissertation 4
thFinal paper: Benchmarks Tool
I’m targeting the Journal of Negro Education
Hamilton’s 8 other technology transfer publications
Hamilton, Clovia, and Simon P. Philbin. "Knowledge Based View of University Tech Transfer—A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis." Administrative Sciences 10, no. 3 (2020): 62.
Hamilton, C. (2018). A Cochrane method systematic review of university tech commercialization research, In Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Management (ASEM) International Annual Conference (IAC), Reimagining Systems Engineering and Management, Couer d’ Alene, Idaho, p. 1-11.
Hamilton, C. (2018). Black American Slaves and Freed Slaves Created Frugal Innovations and Creation of a Circular Economy. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the EuroMed Academy of Business (EMAB) in Malta (pp. 593–
603). EuroMed Research Business Institute, Engomi, Cyprus. EuroMed Academy of Business (EMAB), EuroMed Research Business Institute. http://euromed-2018.com/bop.pdf
Hamilton, C., Schumann, D. (2016). Love and Hate in University Technology Transfer. In M. H. Schwartz, Howard (Ed.), The Contribution of Love and Hate to Organizational Ethics, Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations (REIO) (Vol. 16, 95- 122): Emerald Group Publishing.
Hamilton, C. (2015, October). University Technology Transfer from the Attention Based View, In Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Management (ASEM) International Annual Conference (IAC), Indianapolis IN, p 1-11.
Hamilton, Clovia and Crook, Russell (2015). A Meta-Analysis of University Technology Transfer Empirical Research (Summary), in Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research: Vol. 35: Issue 9, Article 4. Available at:
http://digitalknowledge.babson.edu/fer/vol35/iss9/4.
Hamilton, C. (2003). University Technology Transfer and Economic Development: Proposed Cooperative Economic Development Agreements under the Bayh-Dole Act, John Marshall Law Review, 36(2), 397-420.
Hamilton, C. (2002). Adequacy of the 1995 Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property in Complex High-Tech Markets, Computer Law Review & Technology Journal, 7, 23-44.
Any Questions?
Dr. Clovia Hamilton, JD, LLM, MBA
[email protected]
[email protected]
