ISSN (Print) : 0974-6846

Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 8(35), DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i35/74280, December 2015 ISSN (Online) : 0974-5645

Development of Framework for an Integrated

Model for Technology Transfer
Nirmal Kundu1*, Chandan Bhar2 and Visvesvaran Pandurangan3
1
Teerthanker Mahaveer University, Moradabad - 244001, Uttar Pradesh, India;
nkundu97@rediffmail.com
2
Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad - 826004, Jharkhand, India;
chandanbhar@hotmail.com
3
MVN University, Palwal - 121105, Haryana, India;
pvisvesvaran@yahoo.com

Abstract
Background/Objectives: Existing models of Technology Transfer have limited horizon and are either Qualitative or
Quantitative in nature. A model framework is developed which is structured, linked with organizational goal, incorporates
both concepts and has a wider scope. Methods/Statistical Analysis: The research methodology used in this study is a
combination of literature review and key informant interviews. The literature review includes both published as well
as unpublished sources of literature. In case of key informant interviews, informal telephonic discussions have been
carried out with the key executives of the organizations (industry, university, research institutions and government
officials) who are actively engaged in technology identification, technology sourcing and technology transfer. Findings:
It is evident from the study that initial technology transfer started with the passive role of transferee and gradually
they started taking the leading role in the whole technology transfer process. At the beginning, technology transfer
concept was almost limited to search and transfer, gradually it started focusing on transfer plan and implementation
of technology transfer and in most recent time, focus is on effectiveness of technology transfer and creating spirit of
innovation. But again each one of the existing models has a limited horizon and applicability. These existing models are too
specific in nature whereas the practicing managers are in need of a comprehensive integrated model. The analysis of the
limitations of the existing models has proved the necessity for development of an integrated model which is structured,
aims to fulfill the aspiration of the organization, closely links with organizational goal and objectives, considers the
barriers and issues in technology transfer process and takes care of both Qualitative and Quantitative parameters of
technology transfer. Applications/Improvements: This proposed integrated model will help the practicing managers
to take proactive approach and control of forthcoming issues of technology transfer, monitor the progress as well and
create spirit of innovation

Keywords: Integrated Model, Qualitative Model, Quantitative Model, Technology, Transfer

1. Introduction absorption, adaptation, corrective action for technology

The basic purpose of Technology Transfer model is
to transfer a proven or ready to be proven need based
appropriate technology in line with the organization
goal and business strategy from one place to another
following a model which helps to evaluate and identify
the appropriate technology and partner, suggests the
stage wise action plan and check points for successful
transfer and stimulate further innovation on the acquired
technology. The aim and result of a good technology
transfer model is to search, prepare, alert and predict the
success of technology transfer across the boundaries and
inculcate further spirit of innovation.
While the practicing managers in the industry are
always on the lookout for a comprehensive model of
technology transfer, the academician are developing

* Author for correspondence

 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer
scores of new models but they are failing to find the real
application and necessity of the practitioner because
the existing models fail to address the aspirations and
delightedness of the actual or potential users. Technology
transfer is not a process in isolation and it is to be done
to achieve the goal and business of both the organizations
in line with their business strategy. When there exists a
wide gap between the goal and objectives of the transferor
and transferee, the same will definitely be reflected in the
process of technology transfer. Apparently both of them
might have diverse objectives but if they firmly believe
and understand that technology transfer is the best model
for mutual growth and economic development for both
the parties, there is no reason for improper collaboration
and failure in technology transfer.
The detailed analysis of the existing models reveal
that the models developed so far have fragmented and
isolated views and not a comprehensive integrated view.
These models have tried to focus on the failure modes
in technology transfer process or the corrective steps
to be taken to prevent such failures or how to search
for a right technology or partner or stress on successful
implementation plan of technology transfer. But in
reality, a model should integrate all these points together.
Not only it should have an integrated approach but
also it should go to the fundamentals of soul searching
and introspection of the purpose or business. The goal,
objectives and strategy of transferor and transferee should
match and also should be in line with the respective
business objectives. In fact many a time technology
transfer fails because the model used does not take care
of these fundamental concepts. All the existing models
fail to address the above fundamental concept. Another
fundamental drawback of the existing models that they
assume technology transfer is a static process and ends up
with so called successful transfer of technology without
creating further spirit of innovation (except Role shifting
model proposed by Choi, H. J.1). In fact right model of
technology transfer definitely makes the organization
vibrant and should be considered only as a stepping stone
for further innovations. Further, a model will find wider
application when it incorporates both qualitative and
quantitative parameters. Clearly all the existing models
are focusing on either of the two. A model based on
conceptual framework is very much needed but if the
objectives are not quantified and measured, it cannot be
monitored and corrected. A problem when it is solved
from both quantitative and qualitative angle finds more
application in the industry.
2 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
To overcome the above shortcomings of the existing
models, a framework of integrated model of technology
transfer has been proposed which aims to fulfill the
aspiration of the organization. It identifies business
objectives, designs strategy based on SWOT analysis,
mutually identifies technology and partner, identifies
barriers, ensures effective implementation of transfer and
successful assimilation of technology, and creating spirit
of innovation over the entire life cycle of the organization
both in quantitative as well as qualitative way.
2. Technology, Technology
Transfer and Models of
Technology Transfer
Academician and practitioners have defined ‘technology’
and ‘transfer’ in many different ways. Some of the agreed
points are 1. Technology is not just a ‘thing’. 2. Transfer
profoundly depends on ‘being’ or human endeavor. 3.
Technology transfer is always associated with knowledge
transfer. Essentially, ‘technology’ is the knowledge,
information and demonstration that is put to use in order
to accomplish the desired task, ‘Transfer’ is the movement
of technology via some channel from one individual or
organization to another. So technology transfer involves
the application of knowledge, putting a tool in use2.
During technology transfer, the first confusion comes
in the common understanding of the word “Technology”
as referred, understood and interpreted by transferor and
transferee. In case of technology transfer, the transferor
is more inclined to part with “know how” transfer
(type of transfer in which complete knowledge includes
documentation, diagram, demonstration of process,
sample, raw material detail, training etc.), whereas the
transferee insists on “know- why” transfer (in addition
to know-how transfer, there will be dissemination of
knowledge on underlying principles and formulae).
The transferee may be reluctant to share the detail
of knowledge for fear of losing supremacy over the
transferred technology or for fear of ‘boomerang’ effect in
future. Thus there should be a written down agreement as
to what constitutes the technology being transferred and
the elements that comprise the technology. The purpose
of technology and knowledge are different. Purpose of
technology is to use knowledge effectively. Knowledge is
ultimately concerned with ‘knowing’ and technology is
concerned with ‘doing’. Knowledge is what it is whereas
technology is what it could be. Many times it may happen
Indian Journal of Science and Technology

that instead of technology transfer, only knowledge is
getting transferred. This happens in the case of technology
transfer from university, research organization etc.
However, reverse case may also happen in case of transfer
from one business organization to another. In this case
there may be only technology transfer but no knowledge.
In strict sense, knowledge transfer cannot be separated
from technology transfer because there will be always
some diffusion of knowledge in case of technology
transfer, “Technology transfer does not take place without
knowledge transfer as knowledge is the key to control
technology as a whole”3.
“the transfer is recognized as a complex process that
involves the selection of modes (joint ventures, research
cooperation, mergers, licensing, etc.) and transfer
mechanisms (training, seminars, software, technical
information regarding the use and maintenance of
technology, exchange of professionals, etc.) of the identified
technology to be transferred and the full implementation
and uptake of technology”4. Mehri Chehrehpak opined
“the successful technology transfer also depends on many
factors including the state of technology in the related
industry, the requirements, capabilities, possibilities and
weaknesses of the technology, the state of technology in
other countries, national strategies, etc”5.
The technology transfer is a joint effort of transferor
and transferee and in most of the cases from developed
to developing countries. “Generally, for developing
countries effecting technology transfer may not be easy.
The reason is that there is no distinct strategy for transfer
and developing it”6. “For a successful technology transfer
and commercialization, all participants in technology
transfer and commercialization such as bench scientists,
universities, Small-and Medium-Sized Enterprises
(SMEs), accelerators and innovation capitalists need to
coopera­tively operate as a well-integrated body for this
task”7. Various strategies and models have been developed
to implement successful technology transfer in research
organizations and institutes. “Some of these have been
inspired from existing approaches in developed countries
such as the United States. The question is whether these
are suitable for Indian context or not”8.
Technology transfer is a dynamic process. Yet most of
the cases it is perceived as static and technology transfer
agreements are based on static platform of technology.
As technology itself is a dynamic entity, conceiving
technology as a static entity creates mutual confusion
between transferor and transferee at a later stage. As time
Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
Nirmal Kundu, Chandan Bhar and Visvesvaran Pandurangan
passes, level of technology advances making present level
of technology as obsolete. Thus there is always confusion
between the transferor and the transferee whether
the future upgraded version of technology is a part of
technology transfer. Another phenomenon happens in
case of technology is that a high level technology of today
becomes a conventional technology in tomorrow and an
obsolete technology day after. So initially when there were
only few transferor of technology, over the passage of
time, market for technology will not remain static. Thus
technology has always to be considered as dynamic and
technology transfer agreement will be based on dynamic
platform. The extent of dynamism depends on the mutual
understanding and perception of dynamism of transferor
and transferee. There have to be dynamic expectations
from technology transfer which should clearly be
spelt out in technology transfer agreement. While few
organizations are happy with just technology transfer,
other may settle for technology adoption and the third
one may settle for technology innovation. The dynamism
on technology and transfer drives the transferor and
transferee and keep them mental alert.
Edwin Mansfield9 the noted American economist,
makes a useful distinction between vertical technology
transfer and horizontal technology transfer.
“Vertical technology transfer occurs when
information is transmitted from basic research to applied
research, from applied research to development, and
from development to production. Horizontal transfer of
technology occurs when technology used in one place,
organization, or context is transferred and used in another
place, organization, or context”.
The technology transfer was happening since the
evolving of civilization without the formal structure
or model. Segman10 in his pioneer work has traced the
Technology Transfer process from the Neolithic times,
stressed the role of Arabs in technology transfer from
East to West and illustrated how textile expertise was
transferred to the America in 18th and 19th Centuries
from Britain11. The academician and practitioners felt
the necessity of models only after Second World War.
During the period from World War II to late seventies,
more focus was on qualitative models. During the early
eighties, researchers felt the necessity of development
of quantitative models. A problem when it is solved
from both quantitative and qualitative angle finds more
applicability in the industry. From the onset of twenty-
first century, again academician has put more stress
Indian Journal of Science and Technology 3
 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer
on Qualitative model. The same will be evident from
the literature review. Qualitative models have limited
significance because if the objectives are not quantified
and measured, it cannot be monitored and corrected.
In first phase, the early models of technology and
knowledge transfer are based on a unilateral transfer
concept, in which the knowledge-taker or transferee
plays mostly a passive role12. Recent knowledge-based
business theories and models of organizational learning
emphasize the importance of active participation of
the knowledge-taker or transferee. Tiemessen et al.13
considers knowledge transfer as “to accept the partner’s
knowledge, to integrate knowledge into one’s own system
or changing one’s own resources to imitate knowledge”.
“The process of knowledge transfer is not a static one, it is
dynamic, and is part of a process of continuous learning”14.
In the next phase, after the inclusion of transferee along
with transferor, it was realized that there were other
factors like external environment encompassing both the
transferor and transferee and barriers need to be included
in the model formally. In the recent phase, it has been
felt that in addition to absorption and adaptation, the
concept creating spirit of innovation should be a part of
technology transfer model.
3. Research Methodology
The research methodology used in this study is a
combination of
• Literature review
• Case studies
• Key informant interviews
• Author’s personal experience in handling technology
transfer.
The literature review includes both published as well
as unpublished sources. A list of designated key words
and phrases are used for investigation of related literature
and case studies, like
• Technology transfer
• Knowledge transfer
• Knowledge transfer models
• Technology transfer models
• Issues in technology transfer
• Why technology transfer fails
• Technology transfer from developing countries
• Technology transfer in India
• Knowledge transfer in India.
In case studies, attempts have been made to study the
4 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
records of technology transfer that have been occurred
especially between India and other countries – either
successful or failure.
In case of key informant interviews, informal
telephonic discussions have been carried out with the
key executives of the organizations (both industry as
well as university and research institutions) who are
actively engaged in the process of technology transfer.
The discussion is based on the practical use of the existing
models and expectations from a technology transfer
model. However, majority of the informants are from
industry.
The author (corresponding author) has a first-
hand working experience over 27 years in industry on
technology sourcing and technology transfer in leading
public sector, private sector, joint sector organizations
in India and also in multinationals in the areas of
telecommunications, energy metering, automotive
electronics, wind energy and was actively involved in
technology transfer with CIT-Alcatel (France), Siemens-
Atea (Belgium), Ericsson( Sweden), Ushin( Japan), Vestas
(Denmark), Deif A/S (Denmark) and has also attempted
to do technology transfer with countries like China,
Korea, Germany, Spain ,USA etc. This experience has also
been utilized in the research methodology.
4. Research Design
All the significant technology transfer models developed
during period 1960 to 2013 are included in this research.
The models are divided in two categories - Quantitative
model and Qualitative model. For each of these models,
focused area as well as area of application (pre transfer,
transfer and post transfer) has been identified and
limitation is discussed. These models are then tabulated
chronologically. Research objectives are
• To find, if there is any trend of development in terms
of scope of inclusion or area of focus in technology
transfer models.
• To find, if there is any trend/inclination/preference of
any particular type of model (Quantitative or Quali-
tative model).
• Finally, to develop frame work of a model which at-
tempts to address these short comings in the existing
models and find application for the practicing man-
agers.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology

5. Literature Review
5.1 Q
 uantitative Models of Technology
Transfer
Several quantitative models for ensuring successful
technology transfer have been proposed by various
researchers. All the existing quantitative models are
generally based on some or other unique index like
Potential Technological Distance, Technological Catch
up speed, Rate of technology Integration, Technology
Valuation, Technology Index, etc. and attempted
to quantify the index and considered the success of
technology transfer based on that index. Some of the
important quantitative models are discussed below.
5.1.1 Sharif and Haq Model
The earliest quantitative model for TT was proposed
by Sharif and Haq15. The central theme of this model is
Potential Technological Distance (PTD) between the
transferor and transferee. Measurement of PTD gives an
idea how effective will be the result of technology transfer.
It suggests that transferee should search for a potential
transferor with whom PTD is optimum. The concept of
PTD is very important, because for the first time there is
an attempt to go to fundamental concept of quantifying
the performance of technology transfer. The model
focuses on input component (Pre transfer) requirement
for Technology Transfer.
5.1.2 Raz et al Model
The second quantitative model was proposed by Raz et
al16. The central concept of this model is Technological
Catch Up Rate. This model tries to find the technology gap
and quantifies the Technology Catch Up Rate. Technology
catch up rate helps both the transfer and transferee to make
efficient and effective technology transfer strategy, plan of
execution and monitoring. The concept of Technological
Catch Up is very important because this is another
attempt to go to fundamental concept of quantifying the
input component (Pre transfer) requirement of model of
Technology Transfer.
5.1.3 Hamid Jafrieh Model
Another remarkable path breaking quantitative approach
is due to Hamid Jafrieh17 in his thesis on Technology
Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
Nirmal Kundu, Chandan Bhar and Visvesvaran Pandurangan
transfer in Developing countries - A Quantitative
approach. Here the focus is on rate of technology
integration. In his thesis he has attempted to identify socio
economic factors involved in transferred technology.
The model is based on multiple regression analysis as
well as other statistical techniques. He concluded that
rate of technology integration varies greatly with socio
economic development. The model is mostly dwelling
on core component (transfer) of technology transfer
and concerned with impact factor analysis of technology
transfer and measuring the effectiveness.
5.1.4 Technology Valuation Model
Another novel quantitative model on Technology Transfer
is Technology Valuation Model developed by Dong-Hyun
Baek, Wonsik Sul, Kil-Pyo Hong and Hun Kim18. The theme
of the model is Technology valuation. Objective valuation
of a specific technology is needed before negotiation. This
information is helpful for both transferor and transferee
for assessment of price during technology transfer. This
model is again dwelling on core component of Technology
Transfer. Further, this model is significant because it shows
how the research is being focused from initial to core
component of Technology transfer.
5.1.5 Extended Quantitative Model
The fifth significant quantitative model is by Satyanarayan
Pahamutthu19. The central concept of this model is
Technology index. The author has attempted to measure
the technology transfer potentials that exist between
a transferor and a transferee at the industrial level by
incorporating time, technological level and a dynamic
potential technological distance. The main focus of this
study is to develop the technological level of a country,
called ‘technology index’.
Other significant quantitative models were developed
by Liu20, Bhargava21, Jayaraman22 and Truong23.
It can be observed from the above discussions that
initially focus was only on pre transfer and gradually
it was shifted to include the core components of
technology transfer. All the existing quantitative models
deal with the input component (Pre transfer) and core
component (transfer) requirement of Technology
Transfer. It is interesting to note that quantitative models
are significantly silent about the final component (post
transfer) of Technology transfer.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology 5
 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer
5.2 Q
 ualitative Models for Technology
Transfer
The qualitative models of technology transfer came first
and they outnumbered the quantitative models. The
significant qualitative models developed for successful
technology transfer are described below.
5.2.1 Appropriability Model
This model, which was developed in 1945-1950s, suggests
that quality technologies sell themselves24. If the product
has a merit and there is demand in market, technology
transfer occurs automatically. This model assumes that
t/
no special attempt is required by the transferor to sell
technology. The users will “automatically show up at the
researcher’s door” (Devine et al.,25). However, evidence
shows that quality technologies do not usually sell
themselves24. In this model, technology takes the lead role
and the roles of transferor, transferee and the environment
are all insignificants.
5.2.2 Bar-Zakay Model
Bar-Zakay26 developed the model based on a project
management approach. Technology transfer process
is divided into four stages- search, adaptation,
implementation, and maintenance stages. The model
depicts the activities, milestones, and decision points (go
or no-go) in each of these stages. According to Jagota27,
some of the terms, ideas were backdated and not relevant
today. However, the basic framework of the model is
quite impressive and the horizon is quite wide, starting
from search to maintenance. The model stresses on
implementation action rather than conceptualization.
5.2.3 Behrman and Wallender Model
This model (Behrman and Wallender28) is based on seven
stages for international technology transfer. The focus
of this model is on manufacturing related activities like
location, product design, infrastructure development,
plant construction and production startup and providing
external support to strengthen the relationship between
the transferor and transferee. The model stresses on
core component (transfer) of technology transfer. The
drawback of this model is that involvement of the
transferee is very minimal during all the stages of project
management and seems to be dictated by transferor.
6 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
5.2.4 Dissemination Model
This model was popularized by Rogers29 and Rogers and
Kincaid30, (Gibson and Slimor24). This model suggests the
dissemination of technology to the potential users by the
experts (Williams and Gibson31). This model assumes
that an expert will transfer specialized knowledge to the
willing user. The presumption underlying this model is
that once the linkages are established, the new technology
will move from the expert to the non-expert “like water
through a pipe once the channel is opened” (Williams
and Gibson31; Gibson and Slimor24). Here also role of
transferee is insignificant and the effect of external
environment is not taken care.
5.2.5 Knowledge Utilization Model
This model was developed in late 1980s (Gibson and
Slimor24). The model emphasizes on, 1. Interpersonal
communication and 2. Organizational barriers or
facilitators of Technology Transfer. The knowledge
utilization approach represents an evolutionary step
which focuses on how to organize knowledge to effective
use for the technology users (Backer32). The model is
significant because it stresses on communication and
overcoming barriers, i.e., core component of technology
transfer and also involvement of both transferor as well
as transferee.
5.2.6 Schllie, Radnor And Wad Model
This model is a simple and generic model33 (1987)
and has seven elements that influence the planning,
implementation and success of any technology transfer
project. These seven elements are: 1. Transferor, 2.
Transferee, 3. Technology, 4. Transfer mechanism, 5.
Transferor environment, 6. Transferee environment and
7. Environment encompassing both the transferor and the
transferee. This model is path breaking because first time
it stresses on the importance of individual environment of
transferee and transferor as well as greater environment
which is surrounding both of them.
5.2.7 Sung and Gibson Model
The model proposed by Sung and Gibson34 propounded
that the transfer of technology and knowledge, as well as its
implementation and dissemination are key to sustainable
economic prosperity in the emerging 21st century global
Indian Journal of Science and Technology

economy. Initially this model was proposed by Gibson and
Slimor (1990s, as pointed out by Vieira and Lucato35, but
over the years, the model has undergone a few tweaks and
is finally proposed by Sung and Gibson34, which include
four levels of knowledge and technology transfer: the first
level refers to the process of knowledge creation, sharing
of knowledge is the second, the third and fourth levels
are technology implementation and commercialization
of technology developed. This model has wider horizon
and for the first time it touches upon the post transfer
activities and measurement.
5.2.8 Contingent Effectiveness Model
Bozeman36 developed this model of technology transfer
based on an analysis of numerous recent publications in the
field of technology transfer research from universities and
other public research institutions. The model is thus the
result of a systematic mapping of scientific contributions
in this field. The Contingent Effectiveness Model draws
its name from its assumption that parties to technology
transfer have multiple goals and effectiveness criteria. The
model focuses on five parameters for effectiveness:
• Characteristics of the transfer agent,
• Characteristics of the transfer media,
• Characteristics of the transfer object,
• Demand environment, and
• Characteristics of the transfer recipient.
These dimensions are not only exhaustive but are
broad enough to include most of the variables examined
in studies of technology transfer activities. Bozeman’s
effectiveness model is therefore suitable as a starting
point for developing an own model of knowledge transfer
to analyze the effectiveness of transfer barriers but silent
about effectiveness of post transfer.
5.2.9 Five M System Model
Haris and Haris37 proposed a five M system model. This
model shows how the five M’s framework can be used
to consider the effectiveness of international technology
transfer from one domain to another. The five M’s in this
model are:
• Human (user)
• Machine
• Management
• Medium
• Mission
This model takes it account one important element
of technology transfer (Mission) which was neglected
Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
Nirmal Kundu, Chandan Bhar and Visvesvaran Pandurangan
till now in all technology transfer models. The process
of ITT (International Technology Transfer) occurs when
the human used the machine to perform transfer task to
fulfill the mission. This model appears to be appealing
and sensible38
5.2.10 Stage-Gate Model
The stage-gate model27 for ITT is based on six stages.
The model divides the complex technology transfer
process into a set of six predetermined stages and gates.
The stages are made up of tasks with cross-functional
and simultaneous activities. The model specifies a set
of deliverables at each stage. These deliverables are then
verified against predetermined criteria. Based on the
evaluation, a decision may be taken. A very elaborate and
realistic model supposed to take care from conception to
conclusion is of much use in developing countries. The
model focuses on Core Value Determinants (CVD) and
selection of partner and technology. The CVD is based on
customer value creation which is again based on Quality,
cost, convenience, delivery and flexibility, but significantly
the model does not take care of the fundamentals like
goal, strategy, business plan of transferor and transferee
or their strength or weakness in the life cycle model.
On the other hand the model does not emphasis much
on measurement of effectiveness and creating spirit of
innovation.
5.2.11 Role Shifting Model
Ultimate goal of technology transfer is to generate
spirit of new innovations. This model5 depicts how the
transferee today takes the role of tomorrow’s transferor.
A high level of continuing education and training and
also elaborate plans for collaboration between transferor
and transferee are essential for role shifting. This model
puts forward a unique and ultimate concept of successful
technology transfer. If a transferee can assume the role of
transferor of technology, it depicts the ultimate measure
of effectiveness. However, this model has not proposed
any frame work for achieving this role.
It can be seen from the above discussion that in the
technology transfer process, initially the role of transferee
was insignificant and gradually shifted to the central role.
During 1990s the role of communication and effect of
environment has gradually being built into the model.
Finally, the concept of effectiveness and post transfer
activities are considered in the model.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology 7
 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer

6. Discussion on the Existing • During the third phase, the various factors started
being included in the technology transfer model, for
Models of Technology Transfer example role of barriers in 1987 , role of environment
in 1987, technology valuation in 2007, reverse role of
The chronological development of the model is transferee in 2009 shown in Figure 1.
tabulated in Table 1. These technology transfer models • Another important observation is that the qualitative
(qualitative and quantitative) selected are representation models became prominent during 1940-1976, fol-
of technology transfer model development initiatives lowed by quantitative model during 1977-1986. Again
and have importance in the history of development of qualitative models became prominent during 1987-
technology transfer models. If we follow the development 2000, followed by quantitative model during 2001- till
process of technology transfer models, some interesting 2013. Of course during this period, qualitative model
phenomenon comes to light. was also in picture.
• Initially Technology transfer started with a selling
concept. The transferor has a product. He is not both-
ered to know the requirement of the transferee or
finding avenues to sell his product. The transferor was
confident that the product (Technology) will sell on
its own. This period, phase 1 is characterized by Pas-
sive role of the Transferee ( period 1940 -1975)
• In the phase 2, the transferee started to come in lime
light and started to be consulted. This period started
from 1976 and spans till 1986 and is characterized by
Quasi active role of transferee.
• The third phase of technology transfer models starts
from 1987 to 2013. This phase is characterized by ac-
tive participation of transferee. This phase stresses the
importance of post transfer activities in technology Figure 1. Trend in development of technology
transfer. transfer model.

Table 1. Summary of technology transfer models

Model Year Qualitative Quantitative Focus on Remarks
model model
Pre Transfer Post
transfer transfer
appropri- 1945-50 Yes Yes Yes -Passive role of transferor and transferee
ability - Technology takes the lead role
- No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Bar Zakey 1971 Yes Yes Yes - Passive role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Behrman 1976 Yes Yes Yes - Quasi active role of transferor and transferee
and Wallen- - No focus on goal compatibility
der - No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Sharif and 1980 Yes Yes - Concept of Potential Technological Distance
Haq - Passive role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment

8 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology
 Nirmal Kundu, Chandan Bhar and Visvesvaran Pandurangan

Raz et al. 1983 Yes Yes - Concept of Technology Catch Up Rate

- Passive role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Knowledge Late 80s Yes Yes Yes - Active role of transferor and transferee
utilization - No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Dissemina- 1983 Yes Yes Yes Yes - Wide horizon
tion - Quasi active role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Scille, 1987 Yes Yes Yes Yes - Focus on environment
Radnor and - Active role of transferor and transferee
Wad - No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
Sung and 2000 Yes Yes Yes - Wide coverage
Gibson - Focus on environment
- Super active role of transferor - No focus on
goal compatibility
- Focus on overcoming barrier
Contingent 2000 Yes Yes Yes Yes - Focus on environment
Effectiveness - Active role of transferor and
- No focus on goal compatibility
- Part focus on overcoming barrier
Hamid 2001 Yes Yes Yes - Concept of rate of Technology integration
Jafriah - Focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on goal compatibility
- Active role of transferor and transferee
Five M 2004 Yes Yes Yes - Focus on environment
system - Active role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrie
Technology 2007 Yes Yes Yes - Concept of Technology valuation
valuation - No focus on goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
Stage gate 2007 Yes Yes Yes Yes - Focus on environment
- Active role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- Focus on overcoming barrier
Role shifting 2009 Yes Yes - Wide coverage
- Focus on environment
- Super active role of transferor and transferee
- No focus on goal compatibility
- Focus on overcoming barrier
Extended 2011 Yes Yes Yes - Concept of Technology Index - No focus on
Quantitative goal compatibility
- No focus on overcoming barrier
- No focus on environment
- Active role of transferor and transferee

Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology 9
 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer
7. Development of Frame Work
for Proposed Integrated Model
of Technology Transfer
The trend in the development of technology transfer
models (Qualitative/Quantitative) is shown in Figure 2.
A careful observation on the trend analysis shows that
both types of models are sought after but as the focus on
Qualitative model starts, it is followed by introduction of
Quantitative models. The same phenomenon has repeated
in a span of seventy years which probably indicates the
necessity of an integrated model in recent times, Similarly,
if we observe the role of transferee , transferor and the
external factors, it points out that model of technology
transfer is being advancing toward an Inclusive and
Structured based model.
Figure 2. Trend in development of qualitative/
quantitative/integrated model of technology transfer.
An ideal Technology Transfer model should have the
following desired characteristics:
• Model should be structured preferably in the form of
Pre transfer, transfer and post transfer.
• Model should have wide horizon- should cover the
entire gamut of technology transfer starting from
searching and mutual identification of right technol-
ogy and partner and end in creating spirit of innova-
tion.
• Organizational goal, objectives and strategic plan
should be incorporated in technology transfer model
as they are the most important business decision.
• Model should include the barriers and environmental
factor so that it can generate an alert signal.
• Model should not be product or service specific rath-
er it should be generic in nature.
• Model should include both Qualitative and quantita-
tive parameters because the technology transfer de-
cision should be based on both subjective as well as
10 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
objective parameters.
• Model can be used both for Vertical as well as Hori-
zontal Technology Transfer.
• Model should be handy for practicing managers.
After analyzing all the models of technology transfer
(Table-1) based on the above mentioned criteria, it can
be observed that models are structured in the two existing
models (Bar Zakay model26, stage gate model27) but the
models can be better structured if the concept of pre-
transfer, transfer and post- transfer are incorporated.
Few models (Scille, Radnor and Wad33, Sung and
Gibson34, Bozeman36 have taken care of the barriers and
environmental factors. While Choi’s Role shifting model1
has a focus on post transfer activities or Stage Gate model
has a wider coverage, but none of the model covers
the entire gamut of technology transfer starting from
searching and mutual identification to creating spirit of
innovation keeping in mind the business objectives and
goal of the organizations. Significantly none of the model
has touched upon or made emphasis to incorporate the
concept of organizational goal, objectives and strategic
plan in technology transfer model for enhancement
of customer value. Clearly all the models are based on
either qualitative or quantitative views or are suitable for
vertical or horizontal technology transfer. Due to these
limitations the existing models have limited application in
technology transfer and felt the necessity of development
for an integrated model of technology transfer.
The proposed Integrated Model of Technology Transfer
is structured in three stages namely Pre transfer, Transfer
and Post transfer. All the three stages have specific goals.
Together the final goal of technology transfer is achieved.
Each stage has two gates, first qualitative followed by
quantitative gate. In each stage, a set of qualitative
parameters and then quantitative parameters are
identified both for transferor and transferee. They are first
matched at the qualitative gate and once found matching;
the measurement of set quantitative parameters is started
jointly by transferor and transferee to achieve the goal of
that stage.
The goal in Pre transfer stage shown in Figure 3
is search and mutual identification. The transferor
and transferee will individually study and analyze the
organizational goals, objectives, and strategic plan and
finally match with each other to reach to a common
beneficial association. The transferor should qualitatively
study and express 1. Organizational goal and objectives,
2. Strategic plan, 3. Strength, Weakness, Opportunity
and Threat (SWOT) analysis and 4. Capabilities and if
Indian Journal of Science and Technology
 Nirmal Kundu, Chandan Bhar and Visvesvaran Pandurangan

it matches with the 1. Organization goal and objectives,
2. Strategic plan, 3. SWOT analysis, and 4. Need of the
transferee, the first gate should open and the Quantitative
estimation starts. This stage starts with estimation of
Potential Technological Distance and Catch up speed.
This quantitative estimation and understanding will open
the second gate and help both of them to chart out the
future activities of transfer in more objective way.
Hence the qualitative parameters will be based on
adaptation, diffusion, up gradation, innovation and
creating technology road map. Whereas, for measuring
the efficiency and effectiveness of technology transfer the
quantitative criteria will be based on 1. Time and cost
overrun, 2. Rate of indigenization, 3. Cost reduction,
and 4. Quality and feature enhancement. Based on the
above concept of Technology Transfer, a framework
of Technology Transfer model has been proposed and
presented in Figure 3 through 5.

Figure 3. Technology transfer model initial

component/pre transfer objective: search and find.

The goal of the second stage (transfer) as shown in

Figure 4 is planning, transfer and implementation. At this
stage, both transferor and transferee will study and act on
1. Preparedness, 2. Barrier analysis, 3. Communication
channel establishment, 4. Trust building, 5. mode of
technology transfer, 6. Technology transfer agreement,
7. Identification of critical activities, 8. Implementation
plan and project management, 9. Review and feedback,
10. Managing conflicts and 11. Risk analysis. The Figure 4. Technology transfer model process
qualitative transfer model should be based on the above component/transfer objective: planning and
implementation.
parameters. In order to give an objective and quantified
form, the quantitative measurement should be based on
the following estimations 1. Assessment of preparedness,
2. Barrier impact factor calculation, 3. Technology
valuation, 4. Transient and steady state analysis, and 5.
Technological and managerial competences. In fact here
also there will be two gates one for qualitative and the
second for quantitative gate with a slight time lag.
The goal of the third stage of post transfer shown
in Figure 5 is adoption, adaptation and innovation. At
this stage maximum initiative is from transferee end.
They should study and act on absorption, fine tuning
of the technology, see that diffusion takes place across
the organization, also technology up gradation and
creating spirit of innovation whereas the transferor will Figure 5. Technology transfer model final component/
post transfer objective: adoption, adaptation and
create a support system to augment these activities.
innovation.

Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology 11
 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer
8. Validation of the Model
The shortcomings of the existing models have given rise
to the necessity of the development of an integrated model
which is linked to shared objectives of the transferor and
transferee; have the entire coverage of technology transfer
from selection of partner to creating new technology in
the organization. This model has been validated by the
methodology followed by key informant review of the
industry leader especially in wind industry by qualitative
in-depth interview. The model has been tried by author
as a case of pilot testing in Wind industry in India at RRB
Energy in case of technology transfer with Vestas Wind
System (Denmark) and Deif A/S (Denmark) and got a
very encouraging result to monitor the development and
progress of technology transfer. The model has also been
shared with few colleagues in wind industry but needs a
fine tuning after simulation study.
9. Managerial Implication
Managing Technology is the most important priority
of the day and for happening transfer, understanding
and use of Technology transfer model is of utmost
importance. However, the irony is that in spite of plenty
of technology transfer models are available, most of them
are fragmented, have a limited scope and horizon. The
existing models serve academic purposes and very few
can be utilized in practice. These existing models are
“specific” in nature whereas the practicing managers are
in need of a comprehensive integrated “general” model. In
this paper, focus is made on the application point of view
so that practicing manager takes a proactive approach
and can take control of the situation beforehand on the
forthcoming issues of technology transfer and monitor
the progress as well. However, technology transfer model
should be seen as an instantiation of a technology transfer
process, which can be used for inspiration rather than
prescription Gorschek, T. et al39.
10. Proposition of Further
Research
Due to paucity of time and resource constraints, the
research was limited to literature study, trend analysis,
discussion, case examples, informal questionnaire,
personal interview and sharing of views mainly among
technology transfer professionals in industry. However as
12 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
the research topic is being shared it becomes imperative,
a full-fledged research including academician, industry
experts, research institutes, university/institute technology
transfer cells, government officials, financial institutions,
technology transfer associations are required to find
relative importance of individual factors and fine tuning of
the model is required. In fact, this is an elementary attempt
to create a shift of focus to a structured, comprehensive,
integrated model of technology transfer from either
fragmented quantitative or qualitative approach.
11. Conclusion
This paper identifies the important existing models of
technology transfer. Using chronology of evolution of
models, discussion is done on the merits and limitation
of all the available models. It is evident from this study
that an integrated model better serves the purpose of
practicing managers. Qualitative models have limited
significance because if the objectives are not quantified
and measured, it cannot be monitored and corrected. A
problem when it is solved from both quantitative and
qualitative angle finds more applicability in the industry.
Also it is evident from the study, that initial technology
transfer started with the passive role of transferee and
gradually they started taking the leading role in the whole
technology transfer process. Initially technology transfer
concept was almost limited to search and transfer, gradually
it started focusing on actual plan and implementation
of technology transfer and in most recent time focus is
on effectiveness and creating spirit of innovation. All
the models so far developed have a limited horizon and
applicability. The analysis of the limitations of the existing
models has proved the necessity for development of
an integrated model which is structured, aims to fulfill
the aspiration of the organization, closely links with
organizational goal and objectives, considers the barriers
and issues in technology transfer process and takes care
of both Qualitative and Quantitative parameters. This
paper has tried to focus on this issue and has proposed an
elementary framework of such an integrated model which
future researchers can improve upon.
12. References
1. Choi HJ. Technology transfer issues and a new technology
transfer model. The Journal of Technology Studies. 2009;
35(1):49–56.
2. Gibson DV, Rogers EM. R&D collaborations on trial. The
Indian Journal of Science and Technology

microelectronics and computer technology corporation.
Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1994.
3. Li-Hua R. Examining the appropriateness and effectiveness
of technology transfer in China. Journal of Technology
Management in China. 2006; 1(2):280–3.
4. Takahashi VP, Sacomano JB. Proposta de um modelo con-
ceitual para analise do sucesso de projetos de transferencia
de tecnologia: Estudo em empresas farmaceuticas. Gestao
and Producao. 2002; 9(2):181–200
5. Chehrehpak M, Alirezaei A, Farmani M. Selecting of opti-
mal methods for the technology transfer by using Analytic
Hierarchy Process (AHP). Indian Journal of Science and
Technology. 2012 Apr; 5(4):2540–6.
6. Reza M, Ghadim K, Sohrabi B. Recognition and selection of
optimal method for transferring technology in Tehran gas
organization. Indian Journal of Science and Technology.
2011; 4(9): 1129–36.
7. Lee J, Lee J, Kim B, Choi YJ. Study for main factors of tech-
nology commercialization by its current process analysis.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015; 8(S1):391–
7.
8. Rath S, Nathani A, Patel D, Kulkarni P, Gota V. Status of
technology transfer in India – The much needed Magic
Remedy. Current Science. 2014; 106(8):1058–60.
9. Mansfield E. Technology Transfer, Productivity and Eco-
nomic Policy. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.; 1982.
10. Segman R. Communication technology: An historical view.
Journal of Technology Transfer. 1989; 14(3,4):46–52.
11. Irwin H, Moore E. Technology transfer and communica-
tion: Lesson from Silicon Valley, Route 128, Carolina’s Re-
search Triangle and Hi-tech Texas. Journal of Information
Science. 1991; 17(5):273–80.
12. Wahab SA, Rose RC, Uli J, Abdullah H. A review on the
technology transfer models, knowledge-based and organi-
zational learning models on technology transfer. European
Journal of Social Sciences. 2009; 10(4):550–64.
13. Tiemessen I, Lande HW, Crossan MM, Inkpen AC.
Knowledge management in international joint ventures. In:
Beamish PW, Killing JP, editors. Cooperative strategies: The
North American perspective. San Fransico: New Lexington
Press; 1997. p. 370–99.
14. Gilbert M, Cordey-Hayes M. Understanding the process of
knowledge transfer to achieve successful technological in-
novation. Technovation. 1996; 16(6):301–12.
15. Sharif MN, Haq AKMA. A time-level model of technology
transfer. IEEE Transactions of Engineering Management
EM. 1980; 27(2):49–58.
16. Raz B, Steinberg G, Ruina A. A quantitative model of tech-
nology transfer and technological catch-up: The case of
developed countries. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change. 1983; 24(1):31–44.
17. Hamid J. Technology transfer in developing countries –
A quantitative approach. TIME Research Institute. 2009;
19–281.
18. Baek D-H, Sul W, Hong K-P, Kim H. A technology valua-
tion model to support technology transfer negotiations. R
and D Management. 2007; 37(2):123–37.
Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org
Nirmal Kundu, Chandan Bhar and Visvesvaran Pandurangan
19. Sathyanarayanan P. An extended model for measuring
technology transfer potential at the industrial level. Austra-
lia: Southern Cross University; 2011 .
20. Liu WG. A quantitative technology transfer model and its
application to aircraft engines. Technological Forecasting
and Social Change. 1993; 44(2):179–86.
21. Bhargava SC. A generalized form of the fisher-pry model of
technological substitution. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change. 1995; 49(1):27–33.
22. Jayaraman V, Truong CN, Agrawal KR. A quantitative
model for measuring technology transfer potentials in In-
ternational Technology Transfer. Working Paper No. QPT
WP/04, February. Department of Quantitative Methods
and Business Operations. University of Western Sydney:
Nepean. 1996.
23. Trunog C. A general unified mathematical model of tech-
nology transfer. International Conference on Quantitative
Methods; Sydney, Australia. 2002.
24. Gibson DV, Smilor W. Key Variables in Technology Trans-
fer: A field – Study Based on Empirical Analysis, Journal of
Engineering and Technology Management, 1991, 8(3–4),
pp. 287–312.
25. Devine MD, James TE Jr., Adams TI. Government support
industry-university research centres: Issues for successful
technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer. 1987;
12(1): 27–37.
26. Bar-Zakay SN. A technology transfer model. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change. 1987; 2:321–37.
27. Jagoda KI. A Stage-gate Model for Planning and Imple-
menting International Technology Transfer. Australia: Uni-
versity of Western Sydney; 2007.
28. Behrman JN, Wallender HW. Transfers of Manufacturing
Technology within Multinational Enterprises. Cambridge,
MA: Ballinger Publishing Company; 1976.
29. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press;
1983.
30. Rogers EM, Kincaid DL. Communication Networks: A New
Paradigm For Research. New York: The Free Press; 1982.
31. William F, Gibson DV, Technology transfer: A communica-
tion perspective. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 1990.
32. Backer TE. Drug Abuse Technology Transfer. Rockville,
MD: National Institute of Drug Abuse; 1991.
33. Schlie TM, Radnor A, Wad A. Indicators of International
Technology Transfer, Centre for the Interdisciplinary Study
of Science and Technology. Evanston: North Western Uni-
versity; 1987.
34. Sung TK, Gibson DV. Knowledge and technology trans-
fer: Key factors and levels. Proceeding of 4th International
Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation; 2000. p.
1–12.
35. Vieira ML, Wagner C. Topicos em gerencia da producao:
Competitividade e ecoeficiencia. Aula realizada na UNI-
NOVE. Notas de aula, 2011.
36. Bozeman B. Technology transfer and public policy: A re-
view of research and theory. Research Policy. 2000; 29(4–
5):627–55.
37. Harris D, Harris FJ. Evaluating the transfer of technology
Indian Journal of Science and Technology 13
 Development of Framework for an Integrated Model for Technology Transfer

between application domains: A critical evaluation of the
human component in the system. Journal of Technology in
Society. 2004; 26(4):551–65.
38. Roshana T, Shah A, Roshartini O, Abdul HN. Internation-
al Technology Transfer (ITT) projects and development of
technological capabilities in Malaysian construction indus-
try: A conceptual framework. Asian Social Science. 2008;
4(8):38–46
39. Gorschek T, Wohiln C, Carre P, Larsson S. A model for
technology transfer in practice. IEEE Software. 2006;
23(6):88–95.

14 Vol 8 (35) | December 2015 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology