Instructions: This configuration involves a close relationship in which the recipient does not have the necessary specific skills and the donor tends to engage in “technology licensing” without high involvement.
Recipients acquire the right to use the Donor’s proprietary technologies for their own use (manufacturing, development, sale, etc.).
Support: In this configuration, donors benefit and more, they have higher engagement. Interactions are conducted under mutually agreed goals and schedules to develop a specific technology or product through “joint research and development” that spreads costs and risks between partners.
Its purpose is to realize shared benefits by combining financial and technical resources based in part on R&D (research and development) contributions (including intellectual property, development experience, research talent, and so on).
Co-prosperity: This configuration involves a close relationship between the two parties, with donors willing to make most of the decisions and take on most of the responsibilities, while donors enter into “joint ventures” or “M&A” with high involvement in technology, manufacturing, distribution, and assembly. Financial resources if the recipients are experienced and have the skills to perform the tasks.
Depending on the capacity of the recipient, license agreements range from – a) Initial license Before the development of technology, b) Prototype License Signed after the development of technology, and c) Cross-licensingEnabling both to share patent rights to develop new products.
These modes (instructions/transactions) are primed for operational performance. When donors have high involvement through collaboration, i.e., a) adaptive co-design, b) joint specification definition, c) joint research and development projects, and d) subcontracts, donors seek strategic performance.
Important aspects that need to be determined in relation to donors in technology transfer activity are – a) Recipient’s trust and willingness to gain trust, b) Understand recipient’s needs and adjust transfer methods accordingly, c) Solve problems, and d) Evaluate recipients. ‘ abilities and apply the right strategy to work with them.
Due to knowledge gap, level of sophistication, disparity in industrial and technical infrastructure, cultural differences and difficulties in adoption and modification, some of the challenges that arise when transferring advanced technology to developed economies are in broadcasting.
What India lacks in technology transfer
Silver Seurat writes: “One of the major problems western technologists face in India is their impatience and frustration with Indian bureaucratic processes, delays in decisions, lack of proper organization and planning. Most of these technicians have limited visits of specific duration and arrive without proper briefing or any understanding of the local culture. More emphasis is now being placed on training such technicians and bringing in middlemen to act as “interpreters” etc. (A realistic approach to technology transfer1979)
Although India has come a long way from Seurat’s decades-old observation, there are some systemic gaps that require tinkering for long-term technology self-sufficiency.
The need for self-sufficiency index
While much of the energy during earlier technology transfers was focused on regulating technology flows, it would be prudent to improve our capabilities in managing transferred technology as well.
India needs to develop expertise in assessing the overall technology transfer strategy to make a clear distinction between types of technology (core or ancillary, eg: fabrication vis-à-vis assembly), whether a technology meets the goals. Considering spillovers due to indigenization, job creation, income distribution, and its impact factor second-order effects.
As the information age accelerates, it would be prudent to construct a “self-reliance index” to benchmark our future efforts to pursue important technologies, shortening technology-driven disruptions.
Academia-industry linkages and resource leverage
Availability of skilled labor is an obstacle to industrial progress and confuses the debate on whether to import technology to match the local skill base or to develop skills at the level of technology.
The answer to this dilemma is the obvious choice of manufacturing skills, but Indian history is full of examples of wrong turns. Importing oil-based technology for fertilizers and railways instead of coal (which was readily available in India).
Any future firm hoping to thrive in India must rely on “resource utilization”. For faster turnaround times, leveraging employment resources requires a framework that includes public agencies, government departments and their institutional infrastructure, trade associations, inter-firm linkages, and collaborative engineering research associations.
Originally developed by the Japanese and expertly replicated by the Taiwanese, this framework is an accelerated national system of economic education. India, unlike Europe and the US, which relies on attracting talent from the developing world, is bound to create and maintain a talent pool. Establishing a cohesive framework will go a long way in achieving goals.
What about market pull?
Indian industry’s R&D investment is very low. It is mostly dominated by Korean-like family enterprises Chaebols. If the government does not focus on demand-pull policies such as commercialization of indigenous semiconductor technology and supporting related product market and technology development, Indian industry will continue to function as a means of finding difficult solutions for import substitution, which has no appetite for absorption. and assimilation of technology.
They will languish as the glorified packaging firms because it is readily available are immersed in ancillary technologies with perpetual dependence on imports of core technologies without taking the pains of developing anything.
Therefore, governments need to move beyond mere sloganeering and move forward with dynamic policies towards tangible targets and focused roadmaps for the industry that are institution-centric, not people-centric.
Inter-firm strategic alliances and quality consciousness in SMEs
Although technology transfer will kick-start an industry, without establishing company-to-company relationships to deepen capacity and core-technology R&D, it will be a difficult task to produce new players and stimulate semiconductor industries.
While institutional support is essential in the early stages of an industry, we cannot afford to discount long-term pressures in open-world competition where quality is key. Technology transfer cannot follow a piecemeal approach.
Traditionally, the Indian experience in manufacturing has focused on getting the manufacturing capability to the recipient with limited hindsight at the early stage.
Lack of indigenization of engineering orientation such as materials, equipment, and product and system development has led to continued dependence on technology donors for further imports.
Unlike the Japanese, Taiwanese, and more recently the Chinese, we have not clearly identified technology development as a strategic objective for import substitution in electronics, translated into concrete goals.
Technology transfer management will play an important role in determining our success. If India wants to stand on its own feet in semiconductor manufacturing, it is high time we take definite steps in this direction.