Technology transfer offices help institutions manage inventions, agreements and commercialisation pathways. They are most effective when researchers provide clear evidence, contributor information and realistic commercial possibilities early.
What matters most
Disclosure should occur before public release when protection may be relevant.
Inventorship, authorship and project contribution are different concepts.
The office must consider institutional obligations, funder terms and prior agreements.
Commercial interest is easier to evaluate when the use case and competing alternatives are clear.
Licensing and spin-out routes require different resources and risk tolerance.
Companies approaching a university should identify the capability or asset they need.
Questions to answer before acting
Use these questions to turn a broad topic into a defined decision, test or work package:
- Has any result already been disclosed publicly?
- Who contributed to the inventive concept?
- Which grants or contracts funded the work?
- Is licensing, collaboration or a new venture the likely route?
A practical sequence
- Step 1. Prepare a non-confidential result summary.
- Step 2. List contributors, funding and existing agreements.
- Step 3. Describe use cases and competing approaches.
- Step 4. Meet the transfer office before external disclosure.
- Step 5. Agree responsibilities, milestones and communication.
Common traps
- Waiting until after publication
- Confusing project participation with inventorship
- Approaching without a defined commercial use
Where this fits in the wider system
This topic belongs to the site’s Research commercialisation pillar. The strongest route normally connects several pillars: a research result may need a testbed, a consortium, an appropriate programme, standards work and a scale-up plan.
Use the planning tools to identify the next uncertainty, then verify the route through the official-source directory.