CHAPTER 6shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/23063/16/16_chapter_6.pdf · institutions to industry during the last ten years. In total, ... Wherever some further clarifications

198

CHAPTER 6

CASE STUDIES: MODEL VALIDATION

199

CHAPTER 6

CASE STUDIES: MODEL VALIDATION

6.1 Introduction

A pilot study of 29 respondents and a primary study of 734 respondents were used for

identifying the influential factors affecting technology transfer. A model for managing

technology transfer in terms of the identified influential factors was developed and the model

was statistically validated using SEM approach from the empirical data collected through a

questionnaire survey. This chapter presents further evidence to support the findings outlined

in the previous two chapters. The research approach adopted to obtain such evidence

comprised a series of case studies involving technology transfer from publicly funded R&D

institutions to industry during the last ten years. In total, twenty technology transfer case

studies were selected to validate the developed SEM model.

The chapter contains a number of sections. First, the research approach is described. The

second section briefly describes the technology transfer projects used as case studies. The

third section analyses the absence or presence of the 22 critical variables/factors of the model

in the above twenty selected case studies. Furthermore, the technology transfer assessment

tool developed and presented in Chapter 5, based on the model factors was also tested using

these case studies to estimate the technology transfer success.

In summary, this final stage of research sought to further validate the developed model for

managing TT from publicly funded R&D laboratories to industry. Technology transfer

agencies/government R&D laboratories, industry and government may use these findings to

enhance technology transfer success.

6.2 Research Approach

With an objective of further validating the developed model, seven experts from the

stakeholders group, i.e. publicly funded R&D institutions, industry and funding agencies,

were invited to participate in the validation interview/meeting to review the results derived

Chapter-6: Case Studies: Model Validation

200

from the SEM model and to examine the extent of the model variables/factors that are present

or absent in the technology transfer case studies considered. The researcher acted as a

coordinator. The profiles of the experts involved in the validation interview are summarized

in Table 6.1. During the interview/meeting, the findings of the research, particularly the

influencing model factors and model fit indices were presented to the experts along with the

salient features of the cases chosen for validating the model in terms identifying the presence

or absence of the 23 critical variables, 19 from the five facilitating/enabling factors/constructs

and 4 from the one outcome factor/construct, i.e. successful technology transfer) that were

emerged from the current research. Subsequently, the experts were also requested to rate the

degree of agreement of the model variables/factors that were present in each case study on the

technology transfer assessment tool format shown in Table 5.19 so that the technology

transfer assessment tool developed and presented in Chapter 5 can also be validated.

Wherever some further clarifications were required, while examing the case studies,

promoters/entrepreneurs were also contacted over phone to clarify those issues. This

facilitates to ensure that the information collected from the validation interviews/meetings

was useful and valuable. Local experts with extensive hands on experience (atleast 5 years) in

technology transfer projects, at the managerial position were approached. The interviewees

were identified through various sources including author’s network, participants in the

questionnaire survey and also referrals from the interviewees who also met the criteria for

inclusion in this study.

Table 6.1 Profile of interviewees for model factors validation

Interviewee Designation Organization Sector 1 Head, Technology

Transfer Publicly Funded R&D Institute

Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals

2 Chief Executive Officer Private Sector Food & Agriculture 3 Project Coordinator Government Funding

Agency Project Financing

4 Managing Director Private Sector Healthcare & Pharma 5 Professor Autonomous

Management Institute Academic/Management

6 Manager (R&D) Private Sector Materials/Engineering 7 Scientist Publc Funded R&D

Institute Materials


201

6.3 Case Studies:

Case studies have been widely used as examples to evaluate the technology transfer and

commercialization effectiveness (Carayannis and Alexander, 1999). Furthermore, case studies

are unique in their ability to provide rich descriptive and prescriptive detail beyond that

available from surveys or other quantitative approaches. The lack of generally accepted theory

of technology transfer/management (Rogers, 1982; Geisler, 1993) also promotes the use of

case studies. The case study approach, also often provides the relevant information to validate

the existing theories (Hartley, 1994). The following case studies have been compiled based on

the literature review (Purushotham, 1999, 2012; Ramaswami, 2005; Visalakshi, 2009) and as

a part of this research and they were used to validate the model factors there by the developed

model in Chapter 5.

Case 1: Hepatitis B Vaccine

M/s. Shanta Biotechnics (P) Ltd., was established by the first generation entrepreneur Dr.

K.I.Vara Prasad Reddy, in the year 1993 with the sole purpose of developing efficacious and

cost effective vaccines and therapeutics that are within the reach of the common man. The

technology development, transfer and implementation was completed in 1998. The case of

Shanta Biotechnics (P) Ltd is one of the most successful cases of technology transfer in India.

This case involves R-DNA based vaccine development, by Osmania University and a start-up

company in Biotechnology i.e. Shanta Biotechnoics (P) Ltd, Hyderabad. The two were helped

at different stages by Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB). The interesting

feature is that the collaboration among these three was close from the initial stages itself and it

went to the extent that the scientist who generated the technology took a sabbatical to work in

the recipient company and saw through the development phase, which led to the successful

transformation of transferred technology into a product. This was further helped by the

CCMB, which did validation studies and toxicological studies. The technology was

transferred on exclusive basis to M/S Shanta Biotechnics (P) Ltd. Angel funding and

government sponsored seed funds have helped it to launch the product at affordable costs.

Intervention and support of government departments by recommending this vaccine to be part

of the Universal Immunization Programme (UIP) created a market for the product that was

needed. Further, this product also created a history. The price of Hepatitis B vaccine, which


202

was earlier determined by an MNC (holding monopoly on this product), was reduced by about

200% and this became affordable to a larger section of population. This case also

demonstrated the possibility of creating a vaccine for a lesser price, which encouraged about

half a dozen companies to get involved in this business. Most of them succeeded leading to

increased access to this vaccine at more affordable prices. The salient features of this case are:

• Close and continued collaboration between public institutions and private enterprise

• Availability of funding at initial stage and pre-commercialization stage can lead to

success of TT

• More responsive government and its policies have a lot to contribute to success of TT.

The technology transfer was a great success and company reported huge profits. For the

successful commercialization of indigenous technology, the company received technology-

day National Award in the year 1999 from Government of India for successfully

implementing the indigenous technology. The company was acquired by Sanofi–Aventis, a

leading global pharmaceutical company in July, 2009. Further details can be found at

http://www.shanthabiotech.com.

Case 2: Heart Valve

M/s. Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, an

autonomous institute under Department of Science & Technology, Govt. of India, designed

and developed a first of its kind Heart Valve Prosthesis over 12 years of Research &

Development work. M/s. TTK Health Care Ltd an established company obtained an exclusive

license to commercialize the Heart Valve technology. After obtaining the regulatory

approvals, the company could successfully produce and market the first Indian made Heart

Valve at an affordable price compared to imported Valves. The Heart Valve branded as “TTK

Chitra Heart Valve” has been successfully implanted in over 50000 patients. The life saving

Heart Valve meets the most stringent international health care standards and costing half of

the imported product. For the successful commercialization of indigenous technology, TTK

Healthcare was given a technology day National Award in 2001. Further details can be found

at http://www.ttkhealthcare.com.


203

Case 3: Detonation Spray Coatings

M/s. International Advanced Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy & New Materials

(ARCI), Hyderabad, an autonomous R&D Centre, under the Department of Science &

Technology, Govt. of India, developed a pilot/semi commercial detonation spray coating

(DSC) technology system in collaboration with Institute of Problems in Materials Sciences

(IPMS) Kieve, Ukraine (former USSR), for coating of different types of engineering

components with ceramic, metal and alloy powders to improve the wear, abrasion and

corrosion resistant properties which in turn enhances the component life by several folds. As a

policy of ARCI, all the technologies transferred by ARCI to industry for commercialization

are usually scaled-up to a demonstration scale to achieve the following objectives:

• To establish reliability and consistency of technology

• To supply sizeable quantity of products to user industries and get feed-back on quality

and usability

• To assess the market size

• To estimate the correct size of commercial plant and the cost effectiveness at that size

• To enhance confidence of not only technology receiver but also the financial

institutions giving loans

• To allow establishment of raw material sources, their quality levels, etc.

• Up-scaling from demonstration facility to commercial plant is easier and more

predictable than from lab-scale

Adapting this strategy successfully has made it possible for ARCI to bridge the gap between

conventional research institutes and hi-tech industry. After re-establishing the optimum

process parameters in the scaled-up process/equipment, reliability of the equipment and

consistency of the product are checked. Once the reliability and consistency is established,

large number of trial runs and job works were undertaken to sensitize the market, to assess the

market size and to estimate the cost effectiveness. For example Detonation Spray Coating

system was operated on a demonstration mode for about 2 years before the technology was

finally transferred for commercial exploitation. Indeed over 13,000 turbine blades of

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd have been coated by ARCI on job work mode using the


204

demonstration unit and they were successfully used in nearly 150 aircraft engines. The DSC

system was made available to strategic and civilian sectors for carrying out job works.

This was the most crucial phase in ARCI’s march towards commercializing the DSC

technology since it afforded multiple benefits and provided crucial inputs through sustained

job-work over a long period, the ARCI staff gained considerable expertise in optimizing and

depositing a wide variety of coatings, handling actual components of industrial dimensions

and addressing such component-specific issues as job manipulation and masking. Valuable

inputs concerning the robustness of the equipment, longevity of various DSC systems accrued

during this period. At the same time, the job work mode provided an opportunity for several

potential user industries to prove to themselves the efficacy of the detonation sprayed coatings

and this contributed significantly to the market sensitization efforts. While achieving the

multiple objectives listed above, ARCI has also generated revenue of Rs. 200 lakhs through

its job work activities with the DSC systems till the technology was transferred to industry.

During the course of the job-work phase, it became abundantly clear that the DSC system was

extremely versatile in its capability to deposit a large variety of coatings, virtually trouble-free

during prolonged operation, could be operated with great ease by trained operators and

commercially very attractive because of low operational costs. This only served to further

reinforce the original conviction that the DSC technology was tailor-made for

commercialization in India. As a consequence, ARCI decided to indigenize the DSC

technology in collaboration with the Ukrainian collaborating institute. Based on the long-term

operating experience at ARCI, additional safety interlocks and some advanced operations

features were incorporated in the refined version of the DSC system finalized for

manufacture. Accordingly, fabrication of five DSC units was completed in August 1999 and,

following extended operational tests, the units were made available in the year 2000 for

transfer/acquisition by the private industries as part of a comprehensive technology transfer

package. With prior efforts of ARCI having already enhanced national awareness regarding

the DSC technology and created significant commercial interest among the industries, the

technology was transferred to four private entrepreneurs within 2 years. This technology was

not available in India, and the Indian industry was getting this service from Singapore at an

exorbitant price.


205

As a result of the substantial demand created for the technology, ARCI also had the luxury of

ensuring that the DSC technology is transferred in a regionally exclusive manner so that the

technology receivers can all flourish. This approach is being already seen to bear fruit as it has

ensured significant growth of the DSC-based job shops currently in operation in a very short

time span. The list of DSC technology receivers are given table 6.2.

Table 6.2: The list of DSC technology receivers

Entrepreneur City (Region) Status M/s. Shafel Tech Chennai (South) Technology transfer completed M/s. Sai Surface Coating Technologies

Hyderabad (Central) Technology transfer completed

M/s. Associated Plasmatron Mumbai (West) Technology transfer completed M/S SVX Powder M Surface Engineering

Noida (North) Technology transfer completed

With the considerable technical expertise developed by ARCI during the DSC technology

generation period, ARCI has been able to provide wide ranging services to the technology

receivers. This includes extension of complete technical support for suitable coating material

selection for any end application, process parameter development, coating characterization

and certification of coating quality to potential customers, demonstration of coating on

prototype components etc., in addition to routine assistance in the matter of installation &

commissioning, rectification of operation related problems and quick supply of spare parts.

All the four units are fairly doing well.

One of the recipients of this technology and fast growing one, is M/s. Sai Surface Coatings

Technology, Hyderabad, which was promoted by a first generation entrepreneur but had over

15 years industry experience. The entrepreneur had initially established his unit in the

Advanced Materials Technology Incubator (AMTI) set up by ARCI in its premises in the year

2000-01 and later shifted to his own premises in the year 2004-05. The entrepreneur utilized

the incubator facility for about 3 years and absorbed the technology and developed market for

the product/service. The incubator helped him to reduce his initial capital investment on land

and buildings. The entrepreneur got full post transfer support as he was located in the

incubator adjacent to the Laboratory and financial assistance from government funding

agencies. M/s Sai surface Coating Technologies subsequently acquired M/S SVX Powder M


206

Surface Engineering Company at an attractive price. The technology was transferred

successfully as the start-up posted a turnover of Rs. 25 crores in the year 2012. Further details

can be found at http://www.smscoatings.com.

Case 4: Broadband Access Technology

M/s. Midas Communication Technology (P) Ltd. was founded by alumni of the Indian

Institute of Technology (IIT), Madras and the first company to be incubated by IIT, Madras

and the TeNet group, Midas Communication Technologies has championed by the

telecommunication revolution through rural and urban India since 1994. The corDECT

(Midas flagship wireless product) technology was developed jointly by IIT and Midas

Communication Technologies and was licensed to Midas Communication Technologies on

exclusive basis. The corDECT wireless technology, which is very cost effective and used to

connect over 3 million people around the World through global economy and grown into a

prominent player in the global telecom market. Technology Development Board (TDB)

provided soft loan for commercializing this broad band access technology by Banyan

Networks. For the successful commercialization of indigenous technology, Midas

Communication Technology was given a technology-day National Award in 2005. Further

details can be found at http://www.midascommm.com.

Case 5: Recombinant Human Epidermal Growth Factor (rhEGF)

M/s. Bharat Biotech International Ltd was established in the year 1996 by the first generation

entrepreneurs Dr. Krishna M. Ella & Mrs. Suchitra Ella. They have commercialized a number

of technologies licensed from India & abroad and became a multi-product company. They

obtained a license for the technology to produce recombinant human Epidermal Growth

Factor (rhEGF) through a public-private partnership for diabetic foot ulcers, burns and skin

grafts from Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, a prominent institute under CSIR.

After obtaining all the necessary regulatory approvals, the company started producing the

products under the brand names REGN-D-150 for diabetic foot ulcers and REGN-D-60 for

burns and skin grafts. These products were introduced first time in India and confirm to global

standards of quality and have competitive advantages of both affordability and availability to

meet the requirement of the common man. The project was successfully implemented by

using internal accruals and financial assistance from Banks and Financial institutions. For the


207

successful commercialization of indigenous technology, Bharat Biotech International Ltd was

given a technology-day National Award in 2005. Further details can be found at

http://www.bharatbiotech.com.

Case 6: ZenScan & VehiScan for Vehicle Traffic Monitoring

M/s. Kritikal Secure Scan (KSS) was set up in 2007 based on IIT, Delhi technology in the

Technology Business Incubation Unit (TBIU) of IIT, Delhi. KSS is in the security and vehicle

traffic monitoring space. They have developed two products i.e. ZenScan & VehiScan, based

on the know-how/license granted to them by IIT, Delhi. ZenScan is an automated under

vehicle scanning system and VehiScan is intelligent vehicle monitoring system, which uses

optical character recognition technology of global standards to detect any foreign bodies in

real time, e.g. explosives, arms, contrabands, etc. that might be hidden under the underside of

a vehicle and automatic number plate reading for tracking and identification of hot listed

(stolen, suspected and barred) vehicles as a part of surveillance solution respectively. The

company received ‘NASSCOM’ Innovation Award in 2008 for their innovative products. The

company was funded by Technology Development Board (TDB) for commercializing the

technology and started marketing its products in India and abroad. Further details can be

found at http:/www. Kritikalsecurescan.com

Case 7: Palm Oil Technology

The commercialization of the Palm oil technology is an example of a know-how transfer

involving the technology developers, technology takers and the intermediaries. It is well

known that the yield of palm oil per hectare as compared to other oils such as groundnut,

coconut, mustard etc. is the highest (about 10 times) and this is more particularly so in the

tropical-cum-coastal areas. The Palm trees were not grown in India till recently as the

technology of extracting Palm Oil from the bunches of fresh fruits was complex, and was

available only internationally. This technology needed minimum plant size of capacity 50

tons/hour, which required a 10,000 Hectares (approx.) palm tree plantation to feed the plant.

Malaysia, the largest producer of Palm Oil in the world has many such large plantations. But

due to the Indian social structure where the farm holdings are 0.5 to 5 Hectares, large

plantations could not suddenly come up. Thus, on the one hand, the small farmers would not

plant the tree unless they were assured that a palm oil processing plant nearby would buy the


208

fruits. The oil in the fruit would become rancid if it was not processed within 24 hours, which

necessitated the need of the processing plant near the plantation sites. On the other hand, the

industry would not set up such plants until it was assured of adequate quantity of raw

materials. It is to be noted that the first fruition of palm trees take place after 3-4 years.

Realizing these limitations, the government intervened in a very pro-active manner to make

the palm oil production a commercial reality in the country. The significant step was taken by

launching the National Oil Seeds Mission Programme that provided linkages amongst several

players for successful development and commercialization of the palm oil technology.

Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kasargode, Kerala under the Indian Council for

Agricultural Research for developing the crop variety; Regional Research Laboratory,

Thiruvananthapuram (RRL-T) for process development; Central Mechanical Engineering

Research Institute (CMERI), Durgapur for developing the Expeller; and Mechanical

Engineering Research & Development Organization (MERDO), Ludhiana for developing

Twin Screw Press, formed as a consortium and developed the technology in late 1990s. The

technology was transferred to Andhra Pradesh Oil Federation, Pedavegi for its

commercialization in the year 2002.

DBT, GOI in collaboration with Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Maharashtra established

three demonstration plantations of 1000 hectares each for growing palm trees; and NRDC to

up-scaled the know-how further to 5, 10 and 20 tons/hr capacity plants with the help of

engineering consultants and fabricators. The first commercial plant of 10 tons/hr capacity

costing Rs. 12 Cr., was supported by financial assistance from TDB (Rs. 340 lakhs), Oil

Missions (Rs. 100 lakhs) and National Cooperative Development Corporation (Rs. 820 lakhs).

The mission concept provided an apex level coordination between technology developers, and

technology receiver. The technology was diffused widely and plants are under operation

successfully in India. This was one of the major successful technology transfer projects often

quoted in the technology transfer literature in agriculture sector (Rama Swami, 2005).

Case 8: Rice Husk Particle Board

This case study involved the technology for producing rice husk boards (RHB) developed by

the Indian Plywood Research Institute (IPRI). IPRI approached NRDC for the transfer of this

technology. IPRI had obtained Indian patent rights and assigned the rights to NRDC. This was


209

necessary as NRDC takes up only those projects for which patent rights are assigned to it.

This facilitates the task of NRDC in searching for technology taker. This was a new agro-

waste product in the world and hence the IPR strategy was very crucial for success of this

technology. NRDC licensed these patents and know-how to Padmavati Panel Boards Ltd.

(PPBL), a newborn industry and designated PPBL as ‘mother licensee’. In the ‘mother

licensee concept’ the industry setting up the first project based on the invention holds the

rights to further transfer the technology to other manufacturers and shares the benefits by

subsequent licensing.

NRDC invested 50% equity in PPBL to facilitate up-scaling and also arranged Rs. 40 lakhs

loan from VCF-IDBI. PPBL set up a technology plant at the cost of Rs.l.2 Cr. A Consultant

was also hired at a cost of Rs. 3 lakhs. PPBL carried out the up-scaling of the process;

improved the product through incremental innovation, further developed 5 new RHB based

products, viz. wood veneer laminated RHB, bamboo mat veneer laminated RHB, jute

laminated RHB, paper laminated RHB and composite RHB using coconut leaf stems;

increased the range of products to cover different sizes and different types (tops covered with

bamboo etc.) for better acceptability; provided proven plant scale technology to subsequent

licensees; and provided training to personnel of subsequent licensees in its plant. The market

feedback was sought through test marketing after the commercialization of the husk board

based products. New ‘add-on’ patents were filed by NRDC in India and ten other rice

producing countries jointly with PPBL. New technologies covering the above RHB based

products were licensed to five more Indian companies. At this stage, there were three partners

of this technology, namely, IPRI, NRDC & PPBL. PPBL as mother licensee had 50% of

technology share and shares revenues earned from licensing the technology to the subsequent

licensees.

NRDC later licensed this technology to a Malaysian client, MHES, which paid a lump sum

premium of US$50,000 and royalty of 2.5% on sales for 10 years. The MHES plant was set

up by NRDC using PPBL as the turnkey sub-conductor (plant-to-plant technology transfer)

during late 1990s. MHES also made incremental innovation by developing coloured RHB.

New joint patents have been filed by NRDC and MHES. MHES has also become a partner in

technology making a total of 4 parties as partners in this technology. Now the patents have

been licensed to an Indonesian company for setting up rice husk particle boards. In this case


210

study, NRDC used the IPR protection strategy for the technology in building linkages, firstly

by identifying an industry from India who would commercialize the technology and assume a

role of a mother licensee for subsequent transfer of this technology to other entrepreneurs in

India and abroad. For subsequent developments in technology, the patents were obtained and

the technology was jointly owned by IPRI, NRDC and PPBL. This strategy further helped in

its transfer to companies abroad. The role of NRDC as an intermediary was significant as it

also evolved a balanced approach for distribution of the royalties between technology

developer, technology taker and the intermediary.

Case 9: Clot-Busters (Streptokinase (SK))

The technology for developing the clot buster was not available in India and hence it was

being imported. Uses of the clot-buster drugs such as Streptokinase (SK) have potential to

save up to 30-40% of lives if given at very early stages. Therefore, Institute of Microbial

Technology (IMT) a premier institute under the council of Scientific & Industrial Research

(CSIR) focused its R&D efforts on streptokinase (SK), which was being used worldwide

since the 1970’s but; it was very costly in the Indian market after import from the West. IMT

developed the technology for natural SK over a period of approximately three years (1995-98)

from its native source, a bacterium that causes sore throat (Streptococcus species).

Search for the technology taker has not been easy. It took nearly two years to find a suitable

industrial partner, although the lab scale technology for natural streptokinase was ready and

most of the pre-clinical and clinical trials were completed and patent was filed. The

experience of IMT suggests that most Indian companies are interested in biotechnology but

seem reluctant to make partnerships with national institutions. Moreover, many companies,

including the major players, prefer taking the 'safe route' of shaking hands with partners

overseas to market a few well-entrenched drugs or vaccines, instead of jointly developing

indigenous technologies either for known molecules or for modified / novel ones.

Subsequently, with the active involvement of the business development unit of IMT and the

researchers themselves the developed technology for natural SK was licensed/transferred to

M/s Cadila Pharma Ltd., Ahmedabad. Remarkably, despite its limited experience in biotech

drugs, this adventurous and bold company could successfully absorb, upgrade and

commercialize the licensed technology in the year 2002. As a result, it could begin marketing


211

natural streptokinase within a short period (approximately one year) of the technology transfer

and the first indigenous clot buster drug (STPase) successfully entered the Indian market at a

highly competitive price. Directly due to the cost advantage that this technology offered to

Cadila, the average price of this life saver drug (all of it was imported from MNCs abroad

prior to STPase) has come down by nearly 50%, a highly significant advantage for the

economically depressed Indian consumer. Currently, nearly one lakh doses per year are being

produced by the licensee.

Case 10: Specialty Monomers

M/s Vinati Organics Limited (VOL) in Lote, Maharashtra has been working in the chemical

sector since 1990’s. The company decided to diversify and approached, NCL seeking transfer

of some new technologies. NCL suggested to VOL to sponsor development of specialty

monomers, namely, 2-Methlyallyl Sulfonic Acid Sodium Salt (SMAS) and 2-Acrylamido-2,

Methyl-1-Propane Sulfonic Acid (AMPS) i.e. ATBS, as they had expertise in this area and

they were not being imported by Indian industry. These specialty monomers find applications

in the acrylate fiber industry for imparting dye-affinity to the fiber. Polymers prepared by

using ATBS as co - monomer are also extensively used in the Enhanced Oil Recovery.

Similarly ATBS is used in water treatment chemicals and in the preparation of specialty

polymers. In May 2000, VOL signed an agreement with NCL to develop a commercially

viable technology for producing specialty monomers and paid the entire Rs.40 lakhs

sponsorship fee at the time of signing of the agreement itself. This highlighted the confidence

of VOL in the capability of NCL. NCL for the first time gave guarantee for product quality,

production capacity and raw material consumption. The deliverables broadly defined as:

a) to develop and demonstrate the process on bench scale; b) to validate and demonstrate the

process on pilot scale with recovery and recycles of excess solvents and reactants; c) to

deliver a basic engineering package; and d) to provide assistance for start-up and

commissioning of the plant.

The dedicated team of NCL put in their best efforts and just in three months time developed

an entirely new process, which was found commercially feasible. Further the process was

successfully demonstrated to VOL on the pilot plant scale for SMAS (8.00 kg/batch scale)

and ATBS (A continuous process of ATBS at 0.5 kg/h scale). NCL delivered the basic


212

engineering package to VOL for 750 TPA SMAS and 1000 TPA ATBS. VOL then obtained

Rs.10 crores soft loan for commercializing the technology. There had been turmoil during the

entire course of project implementation. NCL was failing to provide all the three committed

guarantees as it was the first experience of NCL in this area and both the NCL and VOL

lacked expertise for commercialization of specialty monomers. There was no such plant

existing in India till then. It extended comprehensive assistance to the detailed engineering

firm during engineering, procurement and construction phases of the project. NCL continued

to assist VOL for start-up and commissioning of the plant.

As TDB had provided 10 Cr. for the commercialization plant, it was a difficult process to

justify the money to the reviewing committee of 6 experts of this area. The dedicated team of

NCL with total support of the VOL could solve all the teething problems and operationalized

the plant and fulfilled all the guarantees they had agreed. The industry was involved in

developing the technology development from the bench level itself. The project staff was

trained on all the technical aspects. During the preparation of the basic engineering package,

special equipments were identified for few specific steps. Trials for these were conducted at

vendor’s site at the additional cost of VOL. These vendors extended help by providing

process/performance guarantee for the specialized equipment. Samples were collected at each

technology stage, i.e. bench stage, pilot stage and commercialization stage and sent to the

secondary customer for certification. The next stage was initiated only after such certification.

The SMAS and ATBS, two separate dedicated process plants were constructed at the same

site with common utilities separated by a common walkway. The ATBS plant was

commissioned in October 2002. The recovery and recycle of excess acrylonitrile was

established. The material produced is having >98.6% (by HPLC) purity which is useful for

acrylic fiber Industry. The SMAS plant become operational in July 2003 for crude production

as well as for purification on campaign basis. VOL through its market trials has identified

different market segments, which require different grades of these products.

The material prepared on the ATBS commercial plant was submitted globally to various

customers for their testing and approval. In general it was found that each customer had his

own demand in terms of the product purity and impurity profile. After getting feedback from

the customer about the quality of the product, various issues were identified with respect to


213

these market needs, and were resolved by NCL through additional process development work.

In general, the extra purification methods were developed and demonstrated on plant-scale for

various grades of ATBS.

The SMAS plant also faced similar difficulties in terms of market demands on quality aspects.

Therefore extra purification methods were developed and demonstrated at plant scale. ATBS

is used for absorbing the colour for synthetic wool and for enhanced oil recovery and

specialty polymers (used for making body lotions, contact lenses etc.). SMAS is also used for

absorbing the colour for synthetic wool. The product is being mostly (~ 90%) exported. In

four years time (2000-2003) the production reached a level of 2500 tons/annum capacity of

ATBS; 1000 tons/annum SMAS.

Even after commercialization of technology the two partners were interacting. The VOL is

paying a royalty of Rs 25 lakhs annually to NCL. The technology is backed up by three US

Patents.

This case study highlights the initiative of the industry in looking for technological

opportunities for diversification, which led to building up of initial linkages with R&D

agency. The important aspect, however, was that as the interaction evolved the relationship

between them strengthened. One of the reason for this could be that the industry was more

keen to have the technology developed, had confidence in the capability of the researchers,

and motivated the researchers to develop confidence and accept challenges of technology

development. The R&D agency on its part accepted the challenge and for the first time signed

a contract to provide guarantee on process feasibility, product quality and raw material

consumption. It also continued its contributions to the partnership by providing incremental

innovations even after successful commercialization of the contracted technology and offering

improved by-products and enhancing the production capacity. The business development

group of NCL played a significant role in nurturing the partnerships.

Case 11: Drug (Amlodipine) Molecule

Emcur Pimpri, an industry in Pune, has been in the business of preparation of formulations

since long. It wanted to expand its business by entering into manufacturing of drugs in

addition to their formulations. It approached NCL for technological assistance. A contract

research project to develop drug (Amlodipine) molecule was sponsored by Emcur Pimpri for


214

5 lakhs in June 2000. The partnership was forged by signing a formal agreement by the

industry with NCL. At that time the drug Amlodipin was already developed by Pfizer and was

available in the market. The drug molecule could exist in two chiral forms, one chiral would

treat the hypertension and the other would cause the side effects. The drug developed by

Pfizer had the mix of the two chiral forms of the molecule, which caused lot of side effects.

The existing drug thus had a technical flaw.

In one year’s time, NCL developed a process to separate the desired chiral form from the

mixture of two chiral forms of the drug molecule, which already existed. The process

separated both isomers from asgenic. NCL gave the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API)

to the industry in the scheduled time of one year. In another one year the industry further

carried out formulation studies followed by the phase III trials and converted the lab scale

process into a commercialisable process. Thus in two year time the improved drug called S (-)

Amlodipin was launched in the market. Huge quantity of drug was not required as the dosage

required was only 2.5 mg. With production quantity of ~2.5 tons/ annum, the drug captured

80% of market share in the year 2003. The industry, i.e., Emcur Pimpri is paying royalty to

NCL. It was case of very successful and effective technology transfer from publicly funded

R&D institution to industry.

Case 12: Leaf Cup Making Machine

A large number of technologies are in the form of simple know-how or a simple machine and

cater to the needs of SSI or rural sector. Leaf Cup Making Machine is one such simple rural

technology, which has been developed by the Central Food Technology & Research Institute

(CFTRI), Mysore for moulding different type of natural forest leaves into plates, cups, saucers

etc. It is a simple machine / process based technology of no IPR value, which has an

advantage that local raw materials can be utilized with low investment. However, it has to be

physically demonstrated to rural people and essentially requires the involvement of NGOs.

Moreover it needs the partnership of machine/process plant fabricator, which becomes the

licensee not the user.

The machine was initially installed in a village for demonstration purpose. In the beginning

these cups were used in the wedding parties etc. and gained popularity. Later, various

mechanisms were used for giving popularity to this simple technology, which included


215

demonstration of 55 machines by Rural Technology Demonstration Centre (RTDT) of

NRDC, SISI, NGOs and polytechnics and also through exhibitions and rural fairs. The

technology took about 10 years in getting fully commercialized i.e. in 2003, and presently it

has been licensed to 10 machine fabricators and now there are 1.5 lakh such machines

available in the country each one giving employment to two persons.

Case 13: Biodegradable Plastics

The need for the development of biodegradable plastics arose because of the nuisance created

by waste plastic materials and the ensuing government intervention through legislation to ban

use of plastics at least for some applications. A number of State governments had banned the

use of thin plastic bags like in Delhi, where the use of plastics with less than 20µ thickness

has not been allowed, and an all-out ban has been imposed on the use of plastics in view of

the havoc caused by the clogging of the drainage system in the rainy season. Central Tuber

Crops Research Institute developed the technology for biodegradable plastics through

development of basic formulations containing 40%, 30%, 20% and 10% starch. Central

Plastic Research Institute developed at pilot scale different grades of films and injectables.

Being a new development, it required setting up new standards to be established for quality

and degradation testing and Shriram Industrial Research Institute joined hands in testing the

products for bio-degradability and standardization. Among other technology partners were

NRDC, which was made the overall coordinator for management of IPR and licensing to

industry and DST, which under its HGT scheme provided 50% financial assistance to first

licensees of NRDC. Hindustan Levers agreed to use the material for packing their detergents

even at higher cost. A consultant was hired for market survey.

The technology was licensed in the year 2006 to one industry in each State for making bio-

degradable pellets under license of NRDC. Existing plastic industry was allowed to use

biodegradable pellets to produce any type of product without license of NRDC. Market

testing is however still required. It may be noted that it is not a new product and imported

products from Carnegie, USA are available. The developed biodegradable plastic is much

more costly as compared to normal plastics, which is a major hindrance to commercialization,

though multiple uses of such plastic are possible, for example as mulch bag, disposable

shopping bag, disposable apron, gloves, caps used in hospitals, in pharmaceutical and


216

electronic industry, as moulded articles and packaging material. However, different grades are

needed to meet the requirements of different applications.

The case study highlights the need for development of the technology necessitated by changes

in the government policy viz. ban on use of plastics for some applications. The R&D institute

developed the technology, facilitated by other R&D institutes in further developing it to pilot

plant scale and in setting up of new standards for quality and degradation testing. The

intermediaries, namely, NRDC and DST played an effective role in facilitating the building

up of partnerships with industry and subsequent commercialization of the technology.

Case 14: Catalytic Process for Butadiene Conversion

The Gharada Chemical Limited (GCL), Mumbai is in the business of developing, upgrading

and commercialising the technologies / processes in-house since inception. The owner of

GCL was a technocrat and not an entrepreneur. GCL planned to convert butadiene to

cyclooctene and cyclooctene to nylone-8 (used for making special engineering plastic) and

approached NCL to develop such a process. This process involved two steps, (a) conversion

of butadiene to cyclooctadine; and (b) conversion of cyclooctadine (COD) to cyclooctene

(COE), both being catalytic process. As per the agreement, GCL had set a target of 95%

process efficiency and wanted a commercially viable process at the cost of RS 20 lakhs. GCL

offered additional royalty to NCL so that all the IPR belong to GCL only. GCL could

terminate the agreement for non-performance of technology/time. GCL was to provide

butadiene and catalyst, the raw materials for the first step of the process that was to be

procured from USA. As the raw material for the first step was not made available to NCL, it

took decision to go ahead with the 2nd step process to cut corner on time schedule and to

deliver the 2nd phase product to GCL. GCL provided the required raw material for the 2nd

step.

NCL delivered the process know-how during the year 2003 for the 2nd step with 98%

efficiency and complete conversion of the raw material. It could deliver the process at 5 litre

scale within 6 months. GCL gave Rs 10 lakhs, half the money of the contracted cost, to NCL

and took away all the IPR. GCL however, did not produce / commercialize the project. NCL

was at a total loss, as its technology never reached the market, and did not get the royalty.

This was a unique experience in which NCL was dealing with a technocrat, who was also a


217

member of the Research Council of NCL and had maintained a constant pressure on the

implementing team at NCL. The discussions with concerned NCL team suggests the reasons

for success of part of the project being the timely delivery of the raw material and the

presence of mind demonstrated by the implementing team by offering to go in for the 2nd

step, as cyclooctodine, raw material for the 2nd step, was available in the market. The first

step could not be completed as there was a complete lack of foresightedness for availability of

raw material on part of the industry. The technology transfer was not successful as the

company did not implemented the transferred technology.

Case 15: Heat Pipe based Heat Sinks

Heat pipes are two phase counter current heat transfer devices. The heat pipe programme was

initiated in by International advanced Research centre for Powder Metallurgy and New

Materials (ARCI) in collaboration with Luikov Institute of Heat & Mass Transfer, Bellarus,

Under this collaboration, ARCI established a full-fledged pilot plant facility with a capacity to

produce about 100 heat pipes per day. After carrying out extensive R&D for about 3 years,

ARCI developed technology for different types of heat pipes for different applications. One

such application was in power electronics for cooling the electronic circuits. One of the

techno-entrepreneur who was in the business of power cables/electronics (M/S Capri Cables,

Hyderabad) approached ARCI for heat pipe technology and requested for few samples of heat

pipes to test them in power electronics application. After evaluating their suitability, the

entrepreneur signed technology transfer agreement with ARCI for transfer of technology. As a

part of the technology transfer agreement, large number of heat pipes suitable for the specific

application of interest to the entrepreneur, were produced at ARCI pilot plant on a continuous

basis and field tested for their performance. The personnel from the entrepreneurs company

were also trained on various aspects of manufacturing heat pipes and quality control at ARCI

pilot plant before transfer of technology. Subsequently the entrepreneur has purchased the

technology along with the pilot plant on lease-cum-sale basis in 2004 and established the

production line by adding the balancing facilities in the Advanced Materials Technology

Incubator set up by ARCI, close to its premises, by 2006. ARCI has helped the entrepreneur

in installation, commissioning and trial runs and demonstrated the method of manufacturing

heat pipes of different sizes and specifications at the relocated place. The entrepreneur also

obtained financial assistance from TIFAC under Home Grown Technology programme for


218

commercializing the technology. Although the entrepreneur could develop heat pipes for very

unique and niche applications, he could not increase the volume of production due to lack of

adequate working capital and resources for marketing. He operated the plant with limited

manpower. The technology and its implementation was successful but it was a commercial

failure on account of the technology receivers inability to pool the required resources on time.

Case 16: Ceramic Crucibles for Carbon and Sulphur Analysis

Ceramic crucibles are used for carbon and sulphur analysis in various industries and R&D

laboratories. One of the entrepreneur (M/S Advanced Ceramics, Hyderabad) who has been in

the business of marketing imported brands of crucibles approached International Advanced

Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (ARCI) with a request to develop

crucibles having high refractoriness and resistance to thermal shock and corrosive

atmosphere, using indigenous raw materials. ARCI then developed the technology for

alumino silicate crucibles with the required properties in one years time and secured Indian

patent for the same. The crucibles produced using ARCI technology were extensively field

tested at several metallurgical industries and R&D organizations for evaluating their

performance against the imported crucibles jointly. As the crucibles met the required

specifications M/S Advanced Ceramics entered into an agreement for transfer of this

technology on exclusive basis with ARCI in 2002. The technology was transferred

successfully by ARCI to the company by way of demonstrating the process know-how at

commercial scale with the product meeting the mutually agreed technical specifications.

Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation and TIFAC have provided the financial

assistance for setting up the commercial plant of 6 lakh ceramic crucibles for year. The plant

was under operation since 2003 for about two years, thereafter it became sick unit as the

maintenance costs were gone up, and the company could not increase the volume of

production due to financial problems.

Case 17: Magnesia Aluminate Spinel (MAS)

Magnesia Aluminate Spinel (MAS), on account of its superior properties and cost

effectiveness, has emerged as an important refractory material for steel and cement industries.

A Hyderabad based technopreneur in the refractories field undertook the challenge to develop

MAS aggregates by adapting the principles of in-situ spinelisation. The technopreneur could


219

achieve limited success in terms of degree of spinelisation (only up to 40-50%) and physico-

chemical properties. In order to achieve almost 100% spinel phase and the required physico-

chemical properties, the technopreneur (M/S White Circle Oxide Ltd) collaborated with

International Advanced Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (ARCI)

to develop the technology for MAS. The unique feature of this collaboration was that the

partner was fully aware of and very familiar with the market and also worked with ARCI

scientists on an equal footing since he also had technical expertise in the field on the basis of

his long experience. Thus, ARCI has no problem with regard to assimilation of the technology

by the technology receiver. The technology for MAS was successfully developed by ARCI

and a joint Indian Patent was obtained. After large number of successful field trials with the

refractory bricks made out of MAS in steel and cement plants M/S White Circle Oxide

entered in to technology transfer with ARCI. The technology was transferred on exclusive

basis and the company established the commercial plant for producing 3000 metric tones/year

at Peddapuram in East Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh by obtaining loans from TDB,

IDBI and other banks to the tune of Rs.25 crores in 2003. Although there were some teething

problems in scaling up of the process, they were however solved by further R&D by ARCI

and the technology was transferred successfully during the year 2005. The plant was operated

for a period of one year and later it was closed temporarily due to increase in fuel cost, which

was the major component of manufacturing cost and aggressive marketing by Chinese

manufactures of MAS in India. The company reported its sickness to BIFR in 2006.

Case 18: Nano Silver Suspensions for Antibacterial Textiles

Nanosilver suspensions are being widely used by the textile industry to manufacture odour-

free antibacterial textiles that find applications in hospitals, innerwear, sportswear, socks,

active wear, baby care products etc. and have huge market potential. M/s. Resil Chemicals

Pvt. Ltd. (Resil), Bangalore, a company that supplies chemical finishes to the textile industry

sensed the business opportunity and collaborated with ARCI to develop a highly stable nano

silver suspension for antibacterial textile applications.

ARCI successfully synthesized nanosilver suspensions having particle size of 20-50nm by

adopting a chemical route. The suspensions, first made at laboratory-scale (100 ml batch),

were tested by Resil for antibacterial textile application and approved for further


220

development, involving large scale synthesis. ARCI has subsequently up-scaled the process to

produce nanosilver suspension of 15 Liters per batch. The process parameters to get a

consistent quality and physico-chemical properties of the nano suspension with respect to

stability after dilution, packaging and transport were optimized. The prepared suspensions

demonstrated wash-durable antibacterial activity up to 100 washes, even at concentrations as

low as 1wt% nano silver suspension in the treatment bath. The nano suspension produced at

the ARCI pilot plant was tested by Resil, which demonstrated reproducible results and met all

the industry requirements. Figure.6.1 shows the pilot plant facility to produce nanosilver

suspension and Figure. 6.2 shows the nanosilver treated antibacterial textiles being marketed

by some of the textile companies in India.

ARCI has transferred this technology to M/s Resil Chemicals, on exclusive license basis and

the company prepared one tone of nano silver suspension using the pilot plant facility of

ARCI. Resil has successfully commercialized this technology by establishing an in-house

facility to manufacture about 60,000 kgs/batch nanosilver suspension. The product is sold

under the brand name of “N9 Pure Silver”, which is being marketed by N9 World

Technologies (a marketing arm of Resil). The company is supplying these finishes in India

and abroad to many textile/garment manufacturers for the last 3 years. The technology

development and transfer has been completed by ARCI over a period of 2 years. The

company is manufacturing and selling the product profitably for the last 3 years i.e. 2009

onwards.

Figure 6.1 Pilot plant facility to produce nano silver suspension

Figure 6. 2 Nano silver treated anti bacterial textiles


221

Case 19: Nanosilver Incorporated Ceramic Candle Filters for Water Disinfection

Since ancient times, the antibacterial properties of nanosilver are known. ARCI has developed

a technology, incorporating nanosilver in to the traditional ceramic water filter candles to

provide safe drinking water in rural areas, where the main sources of water (ponds and canals)

are contaminated and existing water purification systems are expensive and unaffordable.

Considering the social need and huge market opportunity, ARCI developed a simple and

inexpensive method to synthesize nanosilver coated ceramic candle filters. The pores of the

candle filters were coated with nanosilver, which acted as flow channels for water to be

filtered and killed the bacteria present in water, rendering safe drinking water.

These nanosilver coated candle filters were extensively tested for their antibacterial activity at

two accredited laboratories and a hospital. All the test results proved the ability of the

nanosilver coated candle filters to reduce bacterial concentration from 105cfu/ml to 0 or nil

cfu/ml after filtration. ARCI conducted a life cycle analysis to evaluate silver leaching into the

filtered water as a function of usage time and long-term antibacterial activity of the candle

filters. The amount of silver leaching out of freshly prepared candle filters was carefully

monitored and the values for five successive filtrations were noted. The results were found to

be well within the WHO limits for silver in drinking water and US EPA limits for colloidal

silver intake by humans. The WHO limit for silver in ionic form in drinking water is 0.1

mg/L. After the laboratory test demonstrated high antibacterial action of the nanosilver

incorporated candle filters, field trials were conducted in 40 villages in collaboration with a

Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). These field trials yielded extremely encouraging

results. The filtered water was tested by H2S vial test every day to ascertain the presence of

bacteria after filtration. The data obtained using canal and pond water from one village over a

seven month period revealed the total absence of bacteria in the filtered water even after its

storage for 72 hours, throughout its use. Similar data was obtained for tap and tank water.

The candle filters used in the field trials were tested for silver leaching by Inductively

Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometer (ICPOES) analysis which demonstrated that

the silver leaching out of the used filter was far less than the WHO limits even after one year

of usage, thereby indicated the strong adherence of silver to the candle surface. Accelerated

tests, carried out on fresh candle filters by immersing them in boiled water for 30 minutes,


222

showed release of less than 0.08 ppm of silver (below the WHO prescribed limit) into the

water. This indicates strong adherence of nanosilver on candle filters.

After satisfactory completion of field trials, the technology was successfully transferred to

M/s SBP Aquatech Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Since the technology was developed in-house and

has huge potential for its application for common people in the society, ARCI has chosen a

policy of transferring the technology on non-exclusive license basis to entrepreneurs/industry.

The company has set up a plant in Hyderabad with a production capacity of 1000 filters per

day and the product is in the market with the brand name of PURITECH®. Technology

Development Board (TDB) or Government of India has extended financial assistance to the

company for commercializing the technology. Figure 6.3 shows mass production of

nanosilver coated water filter ceramic candles and Figure 6.4 shows the nanosilver coated

water filter candle, being marketed in the Indian market.

Although the technology was successfully transferred and the product was commercially

launched in the market in the year 2007, the company could not sustain its growth in the

market due to several financial, management and marketing problems. ARCI is looking

forward to transfer this technology to few more entrepreneurs who have strong financial

background and marketing skills so that the innovative product is made available across the

country.

Case 20: Undecenoic Acid and Heptaldehyde from Castor Oil

India is one of the largest producers of Castor Oil (accounting for 70% of the global

production) and is a large exporter of castor oil. Indian Institute of Chemical Technology has

developed a technology for converting the castor oil into various value added products like

Figure 6.3: Production of nanosilver coated filter candles

Figure 6.4: Nanosilver coated filter candles


223

Undecenoic Acid and Heptaldehyde. These products are used in cosmetics and

pharmaceuticals. Realizing the potential for commercialization of the technology, M/s Gujarat

Oleo Chem Ltd., obtained the license for commercializing the technology from IICT. The

company obtained financial assistance from TDB to set up a commercial plant at a cost of

about Rs. 30 crores. IICT demonstrated the technology at its pilot plant and provided required

training to the staff of Gujarat Oleo Chem Ltd., in the year 2004. Subsequently the company

established the commercial production facility in the year 2006, but could not produce a

product of acceptable quality and became sick. The plant is closed in the year 2008. The key

components of all the 20 case studies used in this research are presented in

Table. 6.3.

Table. 6.3. Summaries of case studies

Case No.

Technology Developed

Technology Transferor

Technology Receiver

Financing Agencies

Year of Technology

Transfer

1 Hepatitis B vaccine

Osmania University

& CCMB-CSIR

Shanta Biotechnics

Pvt. Ltd.

Technology Development Board (TDB)

1998

2 Heart Valve

Sri Chitra Tirunal Institute for

Medical Sciences & Technology

TTK Healthcare NA 2000

3 Detonation Spray Coatings

International Advanced

Research Centre for Powder

Metallurgy & New Materials (ARCI)

Sai Surface Coatings

Technologies

Technology Information

& Forecasting Assessment

Council (TIFAC) &

TDB

2005

4 Broadband

Access Technology

Indian Institute of Technology,

Madras

Banyan Networks/

Midas Communication Technologies

TDB 2005

5

Recombinant Human

Epidermal Growth Factor

(rhEGF)

Institute of Genomics and

Integrative Biology (CSIR)

Bharat Biotech International

Ltd. TDB 2005

6

ZenScan & VehiScan for vehicle traffic

monitoring

Indian Institute of Technology, New

Delhi

Kritikal Secure San Ltd. TDB 2007


224

7 Palm Oil Technology

RRL – T, CMERI (CSIR)

MERDO, CPCRI (ICAR)

AP Oil Federation

TDB, NCDC,

Oil Mission 2002

8 Rice Husk Particle Board

Indian Plywood Research Institute

(IPRI)

Padmavathi Panel Board

Ltd.

NRDC IDBI 1998

9 Clot Buster SK Institute of Microbial

Technology (IMT)

Cadila Pharma Ltd. NA 2002

10 Specialty Monomers

National Chemical Laboratory

(NCL-CSIR)

Vinati Organics Ltd. TDB 2003

11 Drug

(Amlodipine) Molecule

NCL (CSIR) Emcur Pimpri NA 2003

12 Leaf Cup Making Machine CFTRI (CSIR) 10 Machine

Fabricators NA 2003

13 Biodegradable Plastics

Central Tuber Crops Research

Institute (CTCRI) & CPRI

Hindustan Lever

TIFAC-HGT 2006

14

Catalytic Process for Butadiene

Conversion

NCL (CSIR) Gharada Chemical Ltd NA 2003

15 Heat Pipe based Heat Sinks

International Advanced

Research Institute of Powder

Metallurgy & New Materials (ARCI)

Capri Cables Ltd. TIFAC-HGT 2006

16

Ceramic Crucibles for Carbon and

Sulphur Analysis

ARCI Advanced Ceramics Ltd. TIFAC-HGT 2003

17 Magnesia

Aluminate Spinel (MAS)

ARCI White Circle Oxide Ltd. TDB & IDBI 2005

18

Nano Silver Suspensions for

Antibacterial Textiles

ARCI Resil Chemicals Ltd. NA 2009

19

Nanosilver Incorporated

Ceramic Candle Filters for Water

Disinfection

ARCI SBP Aquatech Pvt. Ltd. TDB 2007

20 Undecenoic Acid and Heptaldehyde from Castor Oil

Indian Institute of Chemical

Technology (IICT)

Gujarat Oleo Chem Ltd. TDB 2006


225

6.3.1 Verification of Variables in Case Studies to Validate the Model/Factors

The variables found to be critical for achieving successful technology transfer as emerged

from the empirical study of 734 survey respondents and determined using exploratory factor

analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM)

were presented to the seven focused group of experts. The experts were given the case study

material before the scheduled interview/meeting to enable them to understand the contents. In

all the cases the technology was transferred by a publicly funded R&D institution to industry

and they were all implemented few years ago and matured cases to be used as bench marks to

examine the present research outcomes. On the meeting day, the experts were given the table

containing all the critical variables on one side and the company name on the other side. Each

case was analyzed to see whether the identified 23 variables were present or absent in the

given case of technology transfer project. Once a consensus was reached, the experts were

asked to mark on the case summary table whether the variable was present (√) in the case or

absent (x). Table 6.4 shows the summary statement of verifying the presence or absence of

model variables/factors in the implemented technologies at commercial scale (case studies).

The analysis and discussion on validation of model factors is presented along with validation

of technology transfer assessment tool below.

6.4 Analysis of Results

In case study 1 (Hepatitis B Vaccine), it was found that all the 19 enabling/critical variables

were present in the project (see Table 6.4) and the technology transfer was a great success.

Apart from the technology transferor and transferee meeting all the critical variables strongly,

the main factor contributed for the grand success of the TT project was that the product was

internationally very competitive. Morevoer, the proactive government policy i.e. introducing

Hepatitis-B in the universal immunization programme created a huge market for the product

and the startup company. The application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT

project further revealed that each factor/construct weighted score (Figure 6.5) exceeded the

minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted score

(which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and estimated overall

successful technology transfer potential index was 83% (Figure 6.6). The project is a

successful one as it is doing very well even today.


226

Table 6.4 Verifying the presence or absence of model variables in the cases

Model Factor/ Construct

Observed Variable Case No. / Company Sl.No Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Technology Transferor Factor (TF)

1 Strong IPRs √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 2 Prototype field tested √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x √ √ √ √ √ √ 3 Exclusive Licensing √ √ √ √ √ √ x x √ √ √ x x x √ √ √ √ x √ 4 Training & Demonstrated √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 5 Performance guarantee √ √ √ x √ x √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x 6 Effective communication √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Technology Receiver Factor (RF)

7 Top management champions the project √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

8 Having competent team √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x √ √ x x 9 Strong financial background √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x √ x x x √ x x 10 Marketing capability √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x x x x √ x x

Market Factor (MF)

11 Large market size √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 12 Product meeting user needs √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x √ x √ √ √ x 13 Competitive price and quality √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x √ x x √ √ √

Finance Factor (FF)

14 Techno-economic feasibility/variability √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x √ √ √ √ √ √

15 Easy access to finance √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x √ x x √ √ √ √ √ √ 16 Longer repayment period of debt √ x √ √ √ √ √ x x √ x x x x √ √ √ √ √ √

Government Policy Factor (GF)

17 Proactive legislative acts √ x x x x x √ x x x x x √ x x x x x x x 18 Fiscal incentives √ √ x √ √ √ x X x x x √ x x x x x x x x

19 Availability of the incubation facility √ x √ √ x √ X x x X x x x x √ x x x x x

Successful Technology Transfer (ST)

20 Commencement of Commercial Production √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x √ √ √ √ √ √

21 Attractive return on investment √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x x x x √ x x 22 Launch of product in the market √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x √ √ √ √ √ x 23 Socio-economic development √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ x x √ √ x √ x x

Present Status (S=Successful, F= Failure) S S S S S S S S S S S S F F F F F S F F


227

In case study 2 (Heart Valve), it was noted that out of 19 enabling/facilitating critical

variables, 16 variables were present in the project (Table 6.4). The variables absent were long

repayment period of debt, support of proactive legislative acts/policy like M/s. Shantha

Biotechnics Ltd. had in case 1, and the availability of incubation facilities. Since TTK

Healthcare was an existing profit making company, absence of these three variables did not

affect the technology transfer success much. It is found that the enabling government policies

would tremendously contribute to the success of startup companies as the existing and

established companies could sustain and absorb some deficiencies. The application of

technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project, further revealed that except

Government Policy factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure

6.5) the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted

score (which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and the estimated

overall successful technology transfer potential index was 77% (Figure 6.6). The project is

moderately successful one as it is sustaining in the market.

While examining Case 3 (Detonation Spray Coating System), it was observed that 3 variables

out of the 19 critical variables, were absent in the project (Table 6.4). They are exclusive

licensing, support of pro-active legislative acts and fiscal incentives. Though the company

was not given exclusive license on the technology, the company was however granted a

regional exclusivity i.e. central zone of India for establishing the facility with a right to market

the product/service in India and abroad. The company was able to overcome the weaknesses

posed by the absence of the above 3 variables through its strong marketing capabilities and

strong financial background. The company could get strong support from the incubation

facility made available to them by the technology transferor. The application of technology

transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except Government Policy

factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure 6.5), the minimum

threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted score (which is a

positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and the estimated overall


successful one as it is sustaining in the market.

In case study 4 (Broad Band Access Technology), it was noted that out of 19

enabling/facilitating critical variables, 17 variables were present in the project (Table 6.4).


228

The variables absent were performance guarantee of the technology and pro-active legislative

acts. However, they were able to manage the capital expenditure, in the initial stage of the

project by availing incubation facilities offered by IIT Chennai. The promoters were

technically very sound, having deep domain knowledge in the technology. This has facilitated

to achieve success by managing effectively the other weaknesses. The application of

technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except government

policy factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure 6.5), the


(which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and the estimated

overall successful technology transfer potential index was 82% (Figure 6.6). The project is a

successful one as it is selling the product and sustaining in the market.

In case study 5 (Recombinant Human Epidermal Growth Factor (rhEGF)), it was found that

out of 19 enabling/facilitating critical variables, 17 variables were present in the project

(Table 6.4). The variables absent were support of pro-active legislative acts and availability

of incubation facilities. Since M/S Bharat Biotech International Ltd was an established profit

making company with strong marketing and financial capabilities, the lack of government

support systems did not matter much in commercializing this technology. The application of

technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project, further revealed that except

government policy factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure 6.5)

the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted


overall successful technology transfer potential index was 83% (Figure 6.6). The project is a

successful project as it is selling the product and sustaining in the market.

In case study 6 (ZenScan &VehiScan for vehicle traffic monitoring), it was found that out of

19 enabling/facilitating critical variables, 17 variables were present in the project (Table 6.4).

The variables that were absent are performance guarantee by IIT on the transferred

technology and supportive proactive legislative policies. However, M/s Kritikal Secure Scan

Ltd could get the total support from the IIT incubation unit, which helped them to reduce the

initial capital investment on infrastructure and the technical support of the IIT staff in

addressing the scale-up issues. This has largely helped them to commercialize the technology.

The application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project, further revealed that


229

except government policy factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded

(Figure 6.5), the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct

weighted score (which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and the

estimated overall successful technology transfer potential index was 72% (Figure 6.6). The

project is moderately successful as it is selling the product and sustaining in the market.

In case study 7 (Palm Oil Technology), it was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating

critical variables, 16 variables were present in the project (Table 6.4). The variables absent

were exclusive licensing, fiscal incentives and availability of incubation facilities. Since the

project was emerged out of a government policy on creation of National Oil Seeds Machine

Program for promoting agri-business, the absence of above 4 variables did not matter much in

commercializing this technology. The National Oil Seeds Machine Program coordinated the

entire project implementation successfully and removed all the bottlenecks in implementation

of the project successfully. The application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT

project further revealed that all the 5 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure 6.5),

the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted


overall successful technology transfer potential index was 89% (Figure 6.6). The project is

not only successful but also diffused to many States.

In case study 8 (Rice Husk Particle Board), it was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating


were exclusive licensing, longer repayment period of debt, pro-active legislative acts, fiscal

incentives and availability of incubation facilities. Since M/s. Padmavathi Panel Board Ltd.,

was an established profit making company with strong marketing and financial capabilities

the lack of government support systems and absence of other variables did not matter much in

commercializing this technology. NRDC, the license holder of this technology, made

Padmavathi Panel Board Ltd, as a Joint Patent Holder for subsequent transfers and the

licensing option was in their control to protect the interests of Padmavathi Panel Board Ltd.

The application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that

except government policy factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded




230


project is a successful one as it is selling the product globally and sustaining in the market.

In case study 9 (Clot Busters Streptokinase (SK)), it was found that out of 19


The variables absent were longer repayment period of debt, pro-active legislative acts, fiscal

incentives and availability of incubation facilities. Since M/s Cadila Pharma Ltd was an

established profit making company with strong marketing and financial capabilities, the lack

of government support systems did not matter much in commercializing this technology. The

application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project, further revealed that

except government policy factor and finance factor, the other 3 factors/constructs weighted

score exceeded (Figure 6.5), the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each

factor/construct weighted score (which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology

transfer) and the estimated overall successful technology transfer potential index was 83%

(Figure 6.6). The project is a successful one as it is selling the product and sustaining in the

market.

In case study 10 (Specialty Monomers), it was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating


were support of pro-active legislative acts, fiscal incentives and availability of incubation

facilities. Since M/s. Vinati Organics Ltd was an established profit making company with

strong marketing and financial capabilities, the lack of government support systems did not

matter much in commercializing this technology. The application of technology transfer

assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except government policy factor, the

other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure 6.5), the minimum threshold

weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted score (which is a positive

sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and the estimated overall successful

technology transfer potential index was 81% (Figure 6.6). The project is a successful one as it

is selling the product globally and sustaining in the market.

In case study 11 (Drug (Amlodipine) Molecule), it was found that out of 19


The variables absent were easy access to finance, longer repayment period of debt, support of


231

pro-active legislative acts, fiscal incentives and availability of incubation facilities. Since M/s

Emcur Pimpri was an established profit making company with strong marketing and financial

capabilities, the lack of government support systems did not matter much in commercializing

this technology. The company invested internal accruals for implementing the technology.

The technology is more of a process know-how which is confidential. The application of

technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except financial

and government policy factors, the other 3 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded




project is a successful one it is selling the product and sustaining in the market.

In case study 12 (Leaf Cup Making Machine), it was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating


were exclusive licensing, longer repayment period of debt, pro-active legislative acts and

availability of incubation facilities. Since the license was granted to many small entrepreneurs

in rural areas who were not having adequate financial strength and marketing capabilities, the

real potential of the technology could not be realized, though the technology has got good

market potential. The government support through its various mechanisms would go a long

way in diffusing the technology for its wider applications. The application of technology

transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except financial and

government policy factors, the other 3 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure

6.5), the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct

weighted score (which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and


project is moderately successful as it is selling limited volumes of product against huge

demand and sustaining in the market.

In case study 13 (Biodegradable Plastics), it was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating


were exclusive licensing, strong financial background of the promoters, marketing capability,

product meeting user needs, competitive price and quality, techno-economic feasibility, easy

access to finance, longer repayment period of debts, fiscal incentives, and availability of


232

incubation facilities. The technology was licensed to one industry in each State under the

overall coordination of NRDC. As there was a competition from US based supplier and the

product cost was not competitive, the technology could not achieve its potential of success,

though there was a policy of government to ban thin plastic bags in many major cities. The

application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project, further revealed that all

the 4 factors/constructs weighted score did not exceed (Figure 6.5), the minimum threshold

weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted score (which is a negative

sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and estimated overall successful technology

transfer potential index was 58% (Figure 6.6). The project is a failure at present.

In case study 14 (Catalytic Process for Butadiene Conversion), it was found that out of 19

enabling/facilitating critical variables, 8 variables were very weakly present and 11 were

absent in the project (Table 6.4). Although NCL has developed the final product and

transferred the know-how, M/s. Gharada Chemical Ltd, could not commercialize the

technology, the reasons for which are not known. The application of technology transfer

assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that all the 4 factors/constructs weighted

score did not exceed (Figure 6.5) the minimum threshold weight i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of

each factor/construct weighted score (which is a negative sign for achieving successful

technology transfer) and estimated overall successful technology transfer potential index was

48% (Figure 6.6). The project is a failure.

In case study 15 (Heat Pipe based Heat Sinks), it was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating


were competent team, strong financial background, marketing capability, support of pro-

active legislative acts and fiscal incentives. Although the 16 variables were present in the case

study, but their presence was weak. Although, the entrepreneur got the incubation facilities

support, he could not aggressively market and bring in the required working capital into the

project, and as a result the project could not take off beyond the breakeven point. The

application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that all

the 4 factors/constructs weighted score did not exceed (Figure 6.5) the minimum threshold


sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and the estimated overall successful

technology transfer potential index was 58% (Figure 6.6). The project is a failure.


233

In case study 16 (Ceramic Crucibles for Carbon and Sulphur Analysis), it was found that out

of 19 enabling/facilitating critical variables, 11 variables were present in the project (Table

6.4). The technology transferor and financial factors were relatively stronger than the other 3

factors. Since M/s Advanced Ceramics Ltd was a start-up company, managed by a non-

technical entrepreneur with limited financial and marketing capabilities he could not manage

the project successfully for a longer period. Perhaps the governmental support like availing

incubation facilities could have helped to manage the project towards successful

commercialization. The application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project

further revealed that except technology transferor factor/constructs, the other 4

factors/constructs weighted score did not exceed (Figure 6.5), the minimum threshold weight

i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted score (which is a negative sign for

achieving successful technology transfer) and estimated overall successful technology transfer

potential index was 65%. (Figure 6.6). The project is a failure.

In case study 17 (Magnesia Aluminate Spinel (MAS)), it was found that out of 19


Though the technology transferor, receiver and financial factors were relatively stronger and

have required strength, the remaining 2 factors, i.e. market and government factors were not

having the required strength. Since M/s White Circle Oxide Ltd was a start-up company,

manage by a technocrat entrepreneur could not managed the project successfully for a longer

period due to changes in market conditions such as increased fuel cost and competition from

Chinese products. Perhaps the governmental support like imposing anti-dumping duties on

Chinese imports could have helped to sustain the project towards it successful

commercialization. The application of technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project,

further revealed that technology transferor, technology receiver and financial

factors/constructs weighted scores were exceeded (Figure 6.5) the minimum threshold weight

i.e. 3/4 of the maximum of each factor/construct weighted score (which is a positive sign for

achieving successful technology transfer) but not market and government factors. Although

the analysis resulted into an overall successful technology transfer potential index of 70%

(Figure 6.6), the project was a failure due to the fact that the product is no more competitive

in the market in terms of its price. The company reported its sickness to Board for Industrial

and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) for financial restructuring.


234

In case study 18 (Nanosilver Suspension for Antibacterial Textiles), it was found that out of

19 enabling/facilitating critical variables, 16 variables were present in the project (Table 6.4).

The variables absent were support of pro-active legislative acts, fiscal incentives and

availability of incubation facilities. Since M/s Resil Chemicals Ltd was an established profit

making company with strong marketing and financial capabilities, the lack of government

support systems did not matter much in commercializing this technology. The application of

technology transfer assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except government

policy factor, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score exceeded (Figure 6.5) the


(which is a positive sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and estimated overall


successful one as it is selling the product globally and sustaining in the market.

In case study 19 (Nanosilver Incorporated Ceramic Candle Filters for Water Disinfection), it

was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating critical variables, 13 variables were present in

the project (Table 6.4). The 6 variables absent or weakly present were having exclusive

licensing, competent team, strong financial background, marketing capability (weakly

present), support of pro-active legislative acts, fiscal incentives and availability of incubation

facilities. Since M/s SBP Aquatech Pvt. Ltd, was a start-up company managed by non-

technical entrepreneur could not manage the project successfully because of the weak

financial and marketing capabilities. The application of technology transfer assessment tool

on the TT project further revealed that except technology transferor factor/construct, the other

4 factors/constructs weighted score did not exceed (Figure 6.5) the minimum threshold


sign for achieving successful technology transfer) and estimated overall successful technology

transfer potential index of 62% (Figure 6.6). The project was failure.

The case study 20 (Undecenoic Acid and Heptaldehyde from Castor Oil) also resembles case

study 19. It was found that out of 19 enabling/facilitating critical variables, 12 variables were

present in the project (Table 6.4). The 7 variables absent or weakly present were having

performance guarantee, competent team, strong financial background, marketing capability

(weakly present), support of pro-active legislative acts, fiscal incentives and availability of

incubation facilities. Since M/s Gujarat Oleo Chem Ltd, was a start-up company managed by


235

non-technical entrepreneur could not manage the project successfully because of the lack of

attributes mentioned under technology receiver factor. The application of technology transfer

assessment tool on the TT project further revealed that except technology transferor

factor/construct, the other 4 factors/constructs weighted score did not exceed (Figure 6.5) the


(which is a negative sign for achieving successful technology transfer). Although the analysis

resulted into an overall successful technology transfer potential index of 67% (Figure 6.6) the

project was a failure due to the facts that technology receiver did not have the required

attributes in enough measure mentioned under technology receiver factor/construct. The

technology transfer project was a failure and the company has closed its operations.

Figure 6.5 presents the strength of each dimension/factor compared to the minimum threshold

weight that is required to achieve the successful technology transfer. It can be seen from the

graph that in 19 cases (except case No.14) the technology transferor factor was strong

enough, i.e. more than the minimum threshold weight (3/4 of the maximum of each

factor/construct weighted score) that is required to achieve the successful technology transfer.

Fig. 6.5: Strength of each TT factor/dimension in the case studies

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

Case

Technology Transferor Technology Receiver Market

Financial Government

36

24

18


236

Fig. 6.6: Estimated successful TT potential index

Where as in the case of other factors/dimensions, i.e. technology receiver factor-15 cases,

market factor-13cases, finance factor-10 cases and government factor only one case were

having enough strength, i.e more than the minimum threshold weight (3/4 of the maximum of

each factor/construct weighted score) that is required to achieve the successful technology

transfer. It can be seen from the above analysis that only one company that was M/S Shanta

Biotechnics Pvt. Ltd., was found to have the required strength in all the five factors/strengths

and achieved outstanding success. Few other projects were also successful, because they were

able to address the weaknesses present in respective factors/constructs appropriately. There

must be substantive strength in all five dimensions/factors for achieving successful

technology transfer (Heslop, 2001).

Figure 6.6 presents the successful technology transfer potential index estimated by applying

the technology transfer assessment tool/framework developed in the study in Chapter 5 on all

the 20 case studies. The tool has estimated the successful technology transfer potential index

for all the 20 technology transfer projects described in the case studies, which is ranged

between 48-89%.

6.5 Findings

The examination of critical variables in the form of their presence or absence in the above 20

case studies and the application of technology transfer assessment tool on the 20 case studies

revealed the following:

83 77

82 82 83 72

89

76 83 81 80

72

58 48

58 65

70 80

58 67

0102030405060708090

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Succ

essf

ul T

echn

olog

y Tr

ansf

er

Pote

ntia

l Ind

ex

Case


237

i) The case studies confirmed that all the 19 critical variables are important for

achieving successful technology transfer from publicly funded R&D laboratories to

industry as can be observed in case study number one, M/s Shanta Biotechnics Ltd.,

Hyderabad.

ii) One important lesson to be learned from the study is that there must be substantive

strength in all five dimensions/factors, i.e. technology transferor factor, technology

receiver factor, market factor, finance factor, government policy factor for achieving

successful technology transfer.

iii) The case studies established that presence of large number of these variables out of

the 19 critical variables led to successful technology transfer. For example, case study

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 & 18. These findings were also correlated with the

estimated successful transfer potential index which ranges from 71 to 89%.

iv) The case studies also established that absence of these variables in large numbers

resulted in the failure of technology transfer. For example, case study 13, 14, 15, 16,

17, 19 & 20. These findings were also correlated with the estimated successful

transfer potential index which ranges from 48 to 70%.

v) It was found that the start-up companies required government support like incubation

facilities, easy access to finance and policies to create market for the products as

compared to established companies to make the transferred technology more

successful. (For example case No. 1, 3 & 6).

From the above findings, it is concluded that the model factors and thereby the model is

validated. Based on the results obtained from application of the Technology Transfer

Assessment Tool, the case studies are classified into 3 categories as shown in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5: Classification of successful projects based on index

Successful Transfer Index Degree of Success No. of Cases

>80 Successful 7

71-80 Moderately Successful 6

<70 Failure 7


238

6.6 Summary:

The 5 factors/constructs determined from Structural Equation Model (SEM) in Chapter 5

were selected for model validation, namely, the technology transferor characteristics/factor,

technology receiver characteristics/ factor, market factor, finance factor, enabling government

policy factor. Already implemented 20 technology transfer projects during the period 1998-

2009 were used to analyze the presence or absence of these 5 significant dimensions/factors

and their associated 19 variables in these case studies and thereby validate the developed

model. The analysis in general confirmed that the presence of all the critical variables in any

given technology transfer and its management is necessary for achieving successful

technology transfer. From the above findings it was amply established that the model

variables/factors were valid and thereby the model is valid. It may however be noted that

there are some exemptions. For example if the promoter is having strong financial

background, and good marketing capability or in the case of an established profit making

company, absence of some of the variables like lack of government support, incubation

facilities or access to finance may not influence significantly and negatively the technology

transfer success, as observed in some of the cases studied above. For a first generation

entrepreneur and a start-up company fulfilling or meeting all the variables to the maximum

extent can facilitate to achieve successful technology transfer. This analysis determined that

the variables and the model factors are reliable for monitoring the TT process and evaluating

the degree of value that may result from such technology transfer processes.

Documents

CHAPTER 6shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/23063/16/16_chapter_6.pdf · institutions to industry during the last ten years. In total, ... Wherever some further clarifications