Main Article Content
Research background: technology development and its application for human activities — R&D — have been recognized as the basis of economic performance, a source of technological solutions and of high value-added supply both in scientific literature as well as in the strategic documents of the Government and international organizations. In order to ensure the harmonious activity of the institutions engaged in R&D and to reduce the uncertainty of the commercialization of technologies, an advanced tool for verifying decisions on technology development at early stages of commercialization, i.e. an instrument for assessing the commercial potential of technology, is needed. Over the last decade, the analysis of the tools on a global scale led to the unequivocal conclusion — so far developed methodical basis has suffered from lack of maturity for its practical use in business, a need for assessing commercial potential at an early stage of technology commercialization has been ignored, and the assessment of commercial potential has not considered the specificity of high technology.
Purpose of the article: This article discusses in detail the preparation and application pro-cesses of the model for assessment the commercial potential of high technologies.
Methods: in the model the multiple criteria method is applied the selection of which was determined by the motive related to the goal of assessment — assess the commercial potential of high technologies.
Findings & Value added: The essence of scientific novelty embraces the creation of a qualitatively new, original, science-based model for assessing the commercial potential of technologies thus flexibly applying it to assessing different levels of technologies. The original model is based on: the focus on the specificity of high technologies in assessment the commercial potential of technologies; the focus on the early stage of technology commercialization by assessing the commercial potential of technologies; flexibility in the application of the model taking into account the technological level, legal status, opportunity to assess the commercial potential of technologies in different countries and institutions; mathematical calculations based on assessing commercial potential.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Balcerzak, A. P. (2016). Technological potential of European economy. Proposition of measurement with application of multiple criteria decision analysis. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 12(3). doi: 10.14254/1800-5845.2016/12-3/1.
Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M. B. (2016). Structural equation modeling in evaluation of technological potential of European Union countries in the years 2008-2012. In M. Papież & S. Śmiech (Eds.). The 10th professor Aleksander Zelias international conference on modelling and forecasting of socio-economic phenomena. Conference proceedings. Cracow: Foundation of the Cracow University of Economics.
Bandarian, R. (2007). Evaluation of commercial potential of a new technology at the early stage of development with fuzzy logic. Journal of Technology Management, 2.
Belton, V., & Stewart, T. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-1495-4.
Cho, J., & Lee, J. (2013). Development of a new technology product evaluation model for assessing commercialization opportunities using Delphi method and fuzzy AHP approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(13). doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2013.03. 038.
Cooper, R. G. (2009). How companies are reinventing their idea-to-launch methodologies. Research Technology Management. Product Development institute Inc.
Dereli, T., & Altun, K. (2013). A novel approach for assessment of candidate technologies with respect to their innovation potentials: quick innovation intelligence process. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(3). doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.044.
EPO (European Patent Office) (2017). IPscore® 2.0program provided by the European Patent Office. Retrieved form https://www.epo.org/searching-for-patents/business /ipscore.html#tab-1 (07.09.2017).
Furková, A., & Chocholatá, M. (2017). Interregional R and D spillovers and regional convergence: a spatial econometric evidence from the EU regions. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 12(1). doi: 10.24136/eq.v12i1.1.
Hatzichronoglou, T. (1996). Revision of the high-technology sector and product classification. Paris: OECDs.
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
International Islamic University Malaysia. (2017). Evaluation criteria for commercial potential award. Retrieved form http://www.iium.edu.my/irie/13/index. php/evaluation-criteria/8-iriie/15-commercial-potentialaward (07.09.2017).
Kendiukhov, I., & Tvaronavičienė, M. (2017). Managing innovations in sustainable economic growth. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 3. doi: 10.21272/mmi .2017.3-03.
Kondratiuk-Nierodzińska, M. (2016). New knowledge generation capabilities and economic performance of Polish regions. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 11(3). doi: 10.12775/EQUIL.2016.021.
Martinaitytė, E., & Kregždaitė, R. (2015). The factors of creative industries development in nowadays stage. Economics and Sociology, 8(1). doi: 10.14254/2071-789X. 2015/8-1/5.
Monni, S., Palumbo, F., & Tvaronavičienė, M. (2017). Cluster performance: an attempt to evaluate the Lithuanian case. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 5(1). doi: 10.9770/jesi.2017.5.1(4).
NASA (The National Aeronautics and Space Administration) (2017). Retrieved form https://sbir.nasa.gov/solicit/58007/detail?l1=58014.
Oganisjana, K., Svirina, A., Surikova, S., Grīnberga-Zālīte, G., & Kozlovskis, K. (2017). Engaging universities in social innovation research for understanding sustainability issues. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 5(1). doi: 10.9770/jesi.2017 .5.1(1).
Rahal, A. D. (2005). Assessment framework for the evaluation and prioritization of university technologies for licensing and commercialization: Dissertation. Florida Institute of Technology.
Skavronska, I. V. (2017). Creative industries in Ukraine: analysis and prospects of the development. Economics and Sociology, 10(2). doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2017/10-2/7.
Tetsman, I., Bazienė, K., & Viselga, G. (2017). Technologies for sustainable circular business: using crushing device for used tires. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(4). doi: 10.9770/jesi.2017.4.4(3).
Tvaronavičienė, M., & Razminienė, K. (2017). Towards competitive regional development through clusters: approaches to their performance evaluation. Journal of Competitiveness, 9(4). doi: 10.7441/joc.2017.04.09.
Ustinovičius L., Zavadskas, E. K., & Podvezko, V. (2007). Application of a quantitative multiple criteria decision making (MCDM-1) approach to the analysis of investments in construction. Control and Cybernetics, 36.
Venture Quest Ld. (2015). Online diagnostic tools, importance tree. Retrieved form http://www.venturequestltd.com/tools.html.
WIPO (The World Intellectual Property Organization) (2005). Exchanging value: negotiating technology, licensing agreements.
Zemlickienė, V. (2015). Assessment of the commercial potential of technologies: Doctoral Dissertation. Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
Zemlickienė, V., Mačiulis, A., & Tvaronavičienė, M. (2017). Factors impacting the commercial potential of technologies: expert approach. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 23(2). doi: 10.3846/20294913.2016.1271061.
Żelazny, R., & Pietrucha, J. (2017). Measuring innovation and institution: the creative economy index. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 12(1). doi: 10.24136/eq.v12i1.3.