The effect of many practices that were thought might help to improve technology transfer was investigated by analysing the questionnaires submitted. Not very many conclusions about optimum practices could be drawn with statistical certainty from the analysis because of the limited sample size and the nature of the questions. The results refer to the technology transfer process compared to expectations. The criteria used to judge technology transfer practices were how well the technology transfer met both ends of its schedule and its budget. This is not an absolute measure of effects on technology transfer. For instance in their studies Teece (1977) and Kogut and Zander (1995) could categorically state that subsequent technology transfers are faster and cheaper. It is expected that companies experienced at transferring technology would make allowances for this in their schedules and budgets. However, if the firms were perfect at scheduling and budgeting every transfer would start on-time, finish on-time and on budget (a TTE score of 3).
Technology Transfer Effectiveness (TTE) is a composite measure composed equally
of start-time, finish-time and budget (scoring key in Table 1b). Transfers that are much
better than expected could score as low as TTE = 1.0 and transfers that are much worse
than expected would score as high as TTE = 5.0. Typically TTE differences of less than
0.5 are not statistically significant when using a t-test. Using this standard the effect of
most practices examined was not found to be statistically important.
Nonetheless the following can be stated with reasonable certainty.
Further research methods requiring greater resources such as case studies could be used to analyse some of these practices in more depth. A research methodology such as that used by Subramaniam et al. (1998) may be suitable for further examination of these issues. They conducted multiple open-ended interviews at 13 multinational company affiliates in Japan in their study of global new product development processes.
If processes could be modified so that operator training is easier technology transfer is smoother. Less labour intensive processes are easier to transfer. Therefore, if there is a choice of processes the less labour intensive process or that which it easier to train should be chosen.
A high degree of local autonomy over human resource and finance decisions aids smooth transfer. If the Irish affiliate does not have considerable autonomy in these areas and is receiving a lot of transferred technology, it should try to become more autonomous in these area to help with technology transfer projects.
The second transfer of a technology finishes more on-time than first implementations. If there is a choice of using a new technology or a tried technology and all else is equal, the tried technology will be transferred more on schedule.
When there are five or more visitors to Ireland, the transfer is more likely to start on time. This would indicate that when more help is received from the transferring site, the project will start more quickly.
If less travel is required by Irish people than for earlier transfers, the project is more likely to be on budget. Companies should try and improve other communications and practices to reduce the need for travel with subsequent transfers. This has a positive effect on budgets which could be spent on other things. However, the overall positive benefits of travel should not be overlooked for cost reasons alone. Perhaps, travel abroad should be arranged for other reasons such as product and process development. Participation in development teams is of benefit to technology transfer effectiveness. With this fuller involvement many companies are probably capable of tackling more technically challenging transfers.