Una lettura dinamica del modello di maturità nel trasferimento tecnologico universitario: la matrice MIASLA

Titolo Rivista MANAGEMENT CONTROL
Autori/Curatori Claudia Perillo, Miriam Giampietro, Daniela Mancini
Anno di pubblicazione 2026 Fascicolo 2026/1 Suppl.
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 23 P. 61-83 Dimensione file 122 KB
DOI 10.3280/MACO2026-001-S1004
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche.

In light of the growing interest among universities in providing strategic support for their technology transfer activities, the objective of this study is to propose an evolution of the Technology Transfer Office maturity model. The aim is to transform the model from a descriptive tool providing a static snapshot of a university’s technology transfer maturity into a dynamic operational framework. This study uses a systematic literature review of 95 papers covering the period from 2002 to 2025, and a well-established Technology Transfer Office maturity model as a theoretical framework, to explore the identified 125 actions that university Technology Transfer Offices can take to improve their performance and manage technology transfer activities more strategically. Specifically, the Integrated Matrix of Strategic Areas-Maturity Levels-Actions (MIASLA) provides universities with practical advice and concrete guidance to universities on how to plan and manage the transition to a higher maturity level, thereby supporting the continuous improvement of their technology transfer processes.

Parole chiave:Maturity Model, Technology Transfer Office, University Technology Transfer, MIASLA matrix

  1. Baglieri D., Baldi F., & Tucci C. L. (2018). University technology transfer office business models: One size does not fit all. Technovation, 76, pp. 51-63.
  2. NETVAL (2025). 20º Rapporto Netval: un’occasione persa?. Netval. https://netval.it/rapporti-netval/rapporto-netval-2025.
  3. Abreu M., & Grinevich V. (2013). The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities. Research Policy, 42(2), pp. 408-422.
  4. Adekunle S. A., Aigbavboa C., Ejohwomu O., Ikuabe M., & Ogunbayo B. (2022). A Critical Review of Maturity Model Development in the Digitisation Era. Buildings, 12(6), 858.
  5. Algieri B., Aquino A., & Succurro M. (2013). Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: the case of Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38, pp. 382-400.
  6. Anderson T. R., Daim T. U., & Lavoie F. F. (2007). Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation, 27(5), pp. 306-318.
  7. Andini M., Bertolotti F., Citino L., D’Amuri F., Linarello A. & Mattei G. (2025). Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers). N. 954 - Ricerca, innovazione e trasferimento tecnologico in Italia, Banca d’Italia. (online). https://www.bancaditalia.it/pubblicazioni/qef/2025-0954/index.html?dotcache=refresh.
  8. ANVUR, GEV Interdisciplinare (2026). Valutazione della Qualità della Ricerca 2020-2024: Rapporto finale di Area. Gruppo di Esperti della Valutazione. Attività di valorizzazione delle conoscenze.
  9. Becker J., Knackstedt R., & Pöppelbuß J. (2009). Developing maturity models for IT management: A procedure model and its application. Business & information systems engineering, 1, pp. 213-222.
  10. Brescia F., Colombo G., & Landoni P. (2016). Organizational structures of Knowledge
  11. Transfer Offices: an analysis of the world’s top-ranked universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41, pp. 132-151.
  12. Cardoni A. (2018). Le sfide evolutive del Management Control tra relazioni strategiche, innovazione e discontinuità: a knowledge transfer matter?. Management Control, 1, pp. 5-15.
  13. Carvalho J. V., Rocha Á., van de Wetering R., & Abreu A. (2019). A Maturity model for hospital information systems. Journal of Business Research, 94, pp. 388-399.
  14. Debackere K. (2010). The rise of the academic technology transfer organization. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, 55(2), pp. 175-190
  15. De Beer C., Secundo G., Passiante G., & Schutte C. S. (2017). A mechanism for sharing best practices between university technology transfer offices. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 15(4), pp. 523-532.
  16. De Bruin T., Rosemann M., Freeze R., & Kaulkarni U. (2005). Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In: Australasian conference on information systems (ACIS) (pp. 8-19). Australasian Chapter of the Association for Information Systems.
  17. Ferreira E. J., & Steenkamp R. J. (2015). The exploration of the triple helix concept in terms of entrepreneurial universities and corporate innovation. Corporate Ownership & Control, 12(2), pp. 497-512.
  18. Fidanoski F., Simeonovski K., Kaftandzieva T., Ranga M., Dana L. P., Davidovic M., Sergi
  19. B. S. (2022). The triple helix in developed countries: when knowledge meets innovation?. Heliyon, 8(8).
  20. Frederick P., Granieri M. (2015). Development of a holistic tool to identify barriers to success for technology transfer offices. Paper was presented at Financing Knowledge Transfer in Europe (FinKT), Rimini, 16-17.
  21. Grimaldi R., Kenney M., & Piccaluga A. (2021). University technology transfer, regional specialization and local dynamics: lessons from Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 46, pp. 855-865.
  22. Halilem N., & Diop B. (2025). “Meet me at the backdoor”: A multiple case study of academic entrepreneurs bypassing their technology transfer offices. Research Policy, 54(2), 105156.
  23. Hülsbeck M., Lehmann E. E., & Starnecker A. (2013). Performance of technology transfer offices in Germany. The journal of technology transfer, 38, pp. 199-215.
  24. Kim S., Kim H., & Kim E. (2016). How knowledge flow affects Korean ICT manufacturing firm performance: A focus on open innovation strategy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 28(10), pp. 1167-1181.
  25. Lafuente E., & Berbegal-Mirabent J. (2019). Assessing the productivity of technology transfer offices: An analysis of the relevance of aspiration performance and portfolio complexity. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(3), pp. 778-801.
  26. Larsen M. T. (2011). The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence. Research Policy, 40(1), pp. 6-19.
  27. Mettler T. (2011). Maturity assessment models: a design science research approach. International Journal of Society Systems Science, 3(1-2), pp. 81-98.
  28. Muscio A. (2010). What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(2), pp. 181-202.
  29. Page M. J., McKenzie J. E., Bossuyt P. M., Boutron I., Hoffmann T. C., Mulrow C. D., & Moher D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj, 372.
  30. Pearce J. A., & David F. (1987). Corporate mission statements: The bottom line. Academy of Management Perspectives, 1(2), pp. 109-115.
  31. Pfeffer J., & Sutton R. I. (1999). Knowing “what” to do is not enough: Turning knowledge into action. California management review, 42(1), pp. 83-108.
  32. Rasmussen E., Moen Ø., & Gulbrandsen M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26(4), pp. 518-533.
  33. Reeb S., & Pinnecke M. (2021). Continuous Improvement with Maturity Models-A Procedural Model for Action Derivation. In PACIS (p. 220).
  34. Resende D.N., Gibson D. and Jarrett J. (2013). BTP – best transfer practices: a tool for qualitative analysis of tech-transfer offices: a cross cultural analysis. Technovation, 33(1), pp. 2-12.
  35. Romano A., Passiante G., Del Vecchio P., & Secundo G. (2014). The innovation ecosystem as booster for the innovative entrepreneurship in the smart specialisation strategy. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 5(3), pp. 271-288.
  36. Selvaratnam R. M., Warburton S., Parrish D., & Crew S. (2024). A maturity model for micro-credentialing and shorter forms of learning practice in Australasian universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 46(4), pp. 409-424.
  37. Siegel D. S., Veugeler R., & Wright M. (2007). Technology Transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications. Oxford review of Economic Policy, 24(4), pp. 640-660.
  38. Siegel D.S., and Wright M. (2015a). Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink?’’. British Journal of Management, 26 (4), pp. 582-595.
  39. Siegel D.S., Wright M. (2015b). University technology transfer offices, licensing, and start-ups. Chicago handbook of university technology transfer and academic entrepreneurship, 1(40), pp. 84-103.
  40. Thornley C. V., Crowley C., & Ashurst C. (2019). Maturity Models as a Tool for Benefits-Driven Change: A Qualitative Investigation of ten Organisations.
  41. Tranfield D., Denyer D., & Smart P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British journal of management, 14(3), pp. 207-222.
  42. Uctu R., Jafta R. (2014). Spinning-off or licensing? The case of academic technology transfer at two south African universities. Ind. High. Educ., 28(2), pp. 127-141.
  43. Webster J., & Watson R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS quarterly, 26(2), pp. XIII-XXIII.

Claudia Perillo, Miriam Giampietro, Daniela Mancini, Una lettura dinamica del modello di maturità nel trasferimento tecnologico universitario: la matrice MIASLA in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 1 Suppl./2026, pp 61-83, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2026-001-S1004