Guide Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists book. Happy reading Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists Pocket Guide.
Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists [Wim Helwegen , Luca Escoffier] on basesorlojum.cf *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
Table of contents

Multi-Agency Funding Opportunities

Management of Technology Program. Advisor Edward B. Terms of use M. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission. Metadata Show full item record.

Nanotechnology & Science Park

Abstract Nanotechnology, which involves creating and manipulating organic and inorganic matter from the molecular to the nanoscale level, is an emerging, enabling technology that is receiving enormous amounts of attention in industrial and scientific communities. It is an umbrella term for a wide range of science and technologies. Significant and rapid advances in nanoscience and nanotechnology have been made in the past two decades. Numerous potential applications have been identified, with a promise to transform virtually every industry.

Both of the Sensors NSI thrust areas, sensors enabled by nanotechnology and sensors to detect nanoscale materials, will be represented. The development life cycle detailed in the Sensors NSI white paper and the questions posed in the Request for Information serve as framing elements for the organization of the workshop. While the primary focus will be to hear from the community, a federal panel is planned to enable attendees to learn of ongoing research, agency needs, and funding opportunities. The workshop will include case study examples of commercialization success, a small business panel focused on challenges faced in the commercialization of sensors, and breakout sessions to explicitly address the RFI questions regarding standards, testing, manufacturing, and commercialization.

Also planned is a case study focused on navigating the regulatory process. The workshop will bring together experts from a wide-range of application areas, stages of product development, and manufacturing. The aim of the workshop is to identify key challenges faced by sensor developers and determine the critical needs of the community, especially with respect to necessary standards, testing facilities, and advances in manufacturing. The outcomes will be captured in a workshop report. Workshop Agenda and Presentations: Click here to view the agenda. Click on presentation titles below to view available presentations, or speaker names to view bios and abstracts when available.

Submitted Posters: Click here to view submitted posters. Contact: sensorsworkshop nnco. Democratizing Technologies focuses on NGOs with environmental and social justice concerns regarding new technologies and asks: How can NGOs produce more equitable and sustainable outcomes of emerging technologies?

What are the implications of NGO participation in governance for democracy and technological futures?

PDF Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists

The NNI Workshop on the Perception, Assessment, and Management of the Potential Risks of Nanotechnology took place on September , and gathered stakeholders from industry, labor, academia, government, and non-governmental organizations, to discuss the assessment, management, and communication of potential risks associated with the use of nanomaterials.

The Plenary Sessions featured perspectives from various communities on their approach to risk-based decisions. Roundtable Discussions with representation from Emerging Businesses , the Pharmaceutical Industry , and Public Risk Perception and Communication groups also took place on Day 2 of the workshop. The NNI sincerely thanks all those who contributed to the planning, program content, viewed via webcast, and or participated in-person. Other workshop documents are also posted below.

A Perspective from the Consumer Community. Recap of Day 1 and Instructions for Day 2. Risk Analysis. Extended Agenda. Participants List. Theoretical Vignette. Government on the future directions of the NNI.

The recommendations of this one-and-a-half day workshop will inform the development of the NNI Strategic Plan. Objectives : The goal of this workshop was to obtain input from stakeholders — both those new to nanoscale science, engineering, and technology and those already familiar with these fields and with the NNI — regarding revisions to the NNI Strategic Plan that were proposed at the workshop.

Participants were invited to suggest additions to and provide feedback on emphasis areas in the NNI goals, the objectives that support these goals, and the Nanotechnology Signature Initiatives. Comments were also solicited on the relationship between these topics and the revised Program Component Areas, which were presented at the event.

This means that these scientists will depend on their environments in developing their research more than mode1 scientists. The mode2 type is close to Gibbons et al.

Nanotechnology’s Promise: A Big Risk in a Small Package?

While we use close , the modes proposed by Gibbons et al. Mode3 characterizes entrepreneurial scientists, who interact with their environments to share resources and are also driven by a high need for own decision-making in their research. While scientists strive for maximum autonomy Ziman ; Aghion et al. Blumenthal et al. Zalewska-Kurek et al. Here, industry is considered as a means to do research by providing access to needed resources and, often, co-creating research results. We claim that, just as in knowledge production, scientists need to make decisions regarding collaborative research projects to engage with industry.

Projects in which scientists have very little to say are not attractive. As outlined earlier, sharing heterogeneous resources is a necessary condition for an alliance. This approach is usually applied to commercial enterprises, but rarely explicitly and in its entirety to university research settings Van Rijnsoever et al. Resources usually refer to human and social capital that leads to increased research collaboration e.

External resources such as funding are seen as opportunities for new initiatives Auranen and Nieminen Scientists who interact with industry have a high need for interdependence on their environment, because they wish to gain access to resources and to acquire visibility and a reputation Bozeman and Corley ; Reagans et al. As argued above, access to resources is the main driver for establishing relationships with industry, and we hypothesize that a higher need for strategic interdependence will lead to more engagement with industry and thus knowledge transfer.

The higher the needs for organizational autonomy and for strategic interdependence are, the higher the likelihood of knowledge transfer will be. It may be noted that this hypothesis automatically covers the other modes as well, because as we observed before, the modes are continuous. So the analysis of the data will indicate the optimum linear combination of strategic interdependence and organizational autonomy for scientists in order to be most productive in knowledge transfer.

By formulating hypothesis 1 in this way, we want to stress that we expect that mode3 scientists, or entrepreneurial scientists, are most productive in knowledge transfer, as also observed in knowledge production. The reason we do so, is that entrepreneurial scientists are more likely to create demand for their scientific product, thereby increasing the unicity of successful scientific products created in the alliance.

There are a number of supplementary and competing factors in the literature that affect knowledge transfer. A distinction is usually made between institutional characteristics and individual characteristics. In this paper, we focus on factors related to individual characteristics of scientists.

Past behavior of individual scientists in participating in knowledge transfer Bercovitz and Feldman ; Clarysse et al. If the strategic positioning theory stands, these factors found in the literature should just add some explained variance. They suggest that this might indicate that junior scientists consider establishing relationships with industry as building their reputation, while senior scientists capitalize on their network and already gained reputation to access resources for new research directions ibidem.

In strategic positioning theory, academic rank usually correlated with age in the literature is not a separate driver of organizational autonomy, but one of the indicators of organizational autonomy, as we explain later in the measurement section. The higher the position is, the more autonomy a scientist has gained. In the literature, academic rank is seen as a separate factor with a direct effect on knowledge transfer.

Nanotechnology Commercialization for Managers and Scientists - CRC Press Book

Past experience in collaborative research with industry or commercialization of knowledge is seen as an influencing factor for engaging in knowledge transfer. Clarysse et al. Scientists oriented towards industry either have experience in collaborating with industry or working for industry, or are inclined to work for industry. A study by Dietz and Bozeman indicates that career diversity i. The evidence from the literature suggests that industry-oriented scientists will recognize opportunities for knowledge transfer and the accompanying benefits for their career.

Industry career orientation positively affects the effects of both the needs for strategic interdependence and organizational autonomy on knowledge transfer activities. Furthermore, we argue that scientists oriented only towards their scientific development are less likely to recognize collaborative research opportunities with industry and that this will negatively impact the relationship between strategic positioning dimensions and knowledge transfer.

Academic career orientation negatively affects the effects of the needs for strategic interdependence and organizational autonomy on knowledge transfer activities. This large research institute is renowned in an international, competitive environment with employees, of whom are Ph. The institute, as part of an entrepreneurial university, has created an environment for spinoffs in the microtechnology and nanotechnology industry. To date, there are over 40 high-tech startups and a targeted program for cooperation with SMEs set up especially for startups.


  • Toward Replacement Parts for the Brain: Implantable Biomimetic Electronics as Neural Prostheses (Bradford Books).
  • About the author.
  • The Everything Kosher Slow Cooker Cookbook: Includes Chicken Soup with Lukshen Noodles, Apple-Mustard Beef Brisket, Sweet and Spicy Pulled Chicken, ... Pudding with Caramel Sauce and hundreds more!.

Because of this institutional support, we expect a higher likelihood of knowledge transfer activities than in a less entrepreneurial context. Individuals are more likely to get involve with industry if they are trained at institutions that are active in technology transfer Bercovitz and Feldman This should only affect the overall likelihood levels of activities in strategic alliances for knowledge transfer.

The data were gathered in semi-structured face-to-face interviews with scientists. The sample of 39 respondents covered the entire spectrum of scientific positions, ranging from Ph. We base our measurement of engagement in knowledge transfer here on the entrepreneurial process defined by opportunity recognition, exploration, and exploitation to create value Singh ; Shane and Venkataraman , They may or may not be directly involved in commercialization or company formation activities, but their activities can be restricted to producing research results.

No active collaboration with industry, no history of such collaboration, no intentions to collaborate in future. Actively approached potential partners from industry or negotiated contracts with partners from industry. We asked the interviewees open-ended questions about their projects in general and then probed them about their current or past projects with companies or any other relationships with industry or the commercialization of knowledge via a spinoff. They were also asked about their plans regarding collaborative projects. The dependent variable takes the value of 0 if the scientist had no relationships with industry no activities , 1 if they seriously plan to establish research relationships with industry, 2 if they have already actively prepared for joint projects e.

The needs for strategic interdependence and organizational autonomy are measured by the states of interdependence and autonomy as perceived by the scientists. In our research, these states are then evaluated, resulting in the degrees of needs for interdependence and autonomy. Resources needed for research are measured as: research facilities, expertise, funds, feedback, knowledge, skills, network, and reputation. An alternative measurement of the need for organizational autonomy is academic rank, as discussed in the theoretical chapter.

Academic rank is considered low for non-tenure junior staff and high for tenured and other senior staff.