8. oktober 2025 l 8 October 2025 Koper, Slovenia IS 2025 INFORMACIJSKA DRUZBA ˇ INFORMATION SOCIETY 18. Mednarodna konferenca o prenosu tehnologij 18th International Technology Transfer Conference Zbornik 28. mednarodne multikonference Uredniki l Editors: Zvezek E Duško Odić, Terezija Poženel Kovačič, Proceedings of the 28th Robert Blatnik International Multiconference Volume E Zbornik 28. mednarodne multikonference INFORMACIJSKA DRUŽBA – IS 2025 Zvezek E Proceedings of the 28th International Multiconference INFORMATION SOCIETY – IS 2025 Volume E 18. Mednarodna konferenca o prenosu tehnologij 18th International Technology Transfer Conference Uredniki / Editors Duško Odić, Terezija Poženel Kovačič, Robert Blatnik http://is.ijs.si 8. oktober 2025 / 8 October 2025 Koper, Slovenia Uredniki: Duško Odić Služba za projektno informatiko, organizacijo strokovnih dogodkov in konferenc, Institut "Jožef Stefan" Terezija Poženel Kovačič Služba za vsebinsko podporo projektom, prenos tehnologij in inovacije, Institut "Jožef Stefan" Robert Blatnik Služba za vsebinsko podporo projektom, prenos tehnologij in inovacije, Institut »Jožef Stefan«, Ljubljana Založnik: Institut »Jožef Stefan«, Ljubljana Priprava zbornika: Mitja Lasič, Vesna Lasič, Lana Zemljak Oblikovanje naslovnice: Vesna Lasič Dostop do e-publikacije: http://library.ijs.si/Stacks/Proceedings/InformationSociety Ljubljana, oktober 2025 Informacijska družba ISSN 2630-371X DOI: https://doi.org/10.70314/is.2025.ittc Kataložni zapis o publikaciji (CIP) pripravili v Narodni in univerzitetni knjižnici v Ljubljani COBISS.SI-ID 255459587 ISBN 978-961-264-324-9 (PDF) PREDGOVOR MULTIKONFERENCI INFORMACIJSKA DRUŽBA 2025 28. mednarodna multikonferenca Informacijska družba se odvija v času izjemne rasti umetne inteligence, njenih aplikacij in vplivov na človeštvo. Vsako leto vstopamo v novo dobo, v kateri generativna umetna inteligenca ter drugi inovativni pristopi oblikujejo poti k superinteligenci in singularnosti, ki bosta krojili prihodnost človeške civilizacije. Naša konferenca je tako hkrati tradicionalna znanstvena in akademsko odprta, pa tudi inkubator novih, pogumnih idej in pogledov. Letošnja konferenca poleg umetne inteligence vključuje tudi razprave o perečih temah današnjega časa: ohranjanje okolja, demografski izzivi, zdravstvo in preobrazba družbenih struktur. Razvoj UI ponuja rešitve za številne sodobne izzive, kar poudarja pomen sodelovanja med raziskovalci, strokovnjaki in odločevalci pri oblikovanju trajnostnih strategij. Zavedamo se, da živimo v obdobju velikih sprememb, kjer je ključno, da z inovativnimi pristopi in poglobljenim znanjem ustvarimo informacijsko družbo, ki bo varna, vključujoča in trajnostna. V okviru multikonference smo letos združili dvanajst vsebinsko raznolikih srečanj, ki odražajo širino in globino informacijskih ved: od umetne inteligence v zdravstvu, demografskih in družinskih analiz, digitalne preobrazbe zdravstvene nege ter digitalne vključenosti v informacijski družbi, do raziskav na področju kognitivne znanosti, zdrave dolgoživosti ter vzgoje in izobraževanja v informacijski družbi. Pridružujejo se konference o legendah računalništva in informatike, prenosu tehnologij, mitih in resnicah o varovanju okolja, odkrivanju znanja in podatkovnih skladiščih ter seveda Slovenska konferenca o umetni inteligenci. Poleg referatov bodo okrogle mize in delavnice omogočile poglobljeno izmenjavo mnenj, ki bo pomembno prispevala k oblikovanju prihodnje informacijske družbe. »Legende računalništva in informatike« predstavljajo domači »Hall of Fame« za izjemne posameznike s tega področja. Še naprej bomo spodbujali raziskovanje in razvoj, odličnost in sodelovanje; razširjeni referati bodo objavljeni v reviji Informatica, s podporo dolgoletne tradicije in v sodelovanju z akademskimi institucijami ter strokovnimi združenji, kot so ACM Slovenija, SLAIS, Slovensko društvo Informatika in Inženirska akademija Slovenije. Vsako leto izberemo najbolj izstopajoče dosežke. Letos je nagrado Michie-Turing za izjemen življenjski prispevek k razvoju in promociji informacijske družbe prejel Niko Schlamberger, priznanje za raziskovalni dosežek leta pa Tome Eftimov. »Informacijsko limono« za najmanj primerno informacijsko tematiko je prejela odsotnost obveznega pouka računalništva v osnovnih šolah. »Informacijsko jagodo« za najboljši sistem ali storitev v letih 2024/2025 pa so prejeli Marko Robnik Šikonja, Domen Vreš in Simon Krek s skupino za slovenski veliki jezikovni model GAMS. Iskrene čestitke vsem nagrajencem! Naša vizija ostaja jasna: prepoznati, izkoristiti in oblikovati priložnosti, ki jih prinaša digitalna preobrazba, ter ustvariti informacijsko družbo, ki koristi vsem njenim članom. Vsem sodelujočim se zahvaljujemo za njihov prispevek — veseli nas, da bomo skupaj oblikovali prihodnje dosežke, ki jih bo soustvarjala ta konferenca. Mojca Ciglarič, predsednica programskega odbora Matjaž Gams, predsednik organizacijskega odbora i FOREWORD TO THE MULTICONFERENCE INFORMATION SOCIETY 2025 The 28th International Multiconference on the Information Society takes place at a time of remarkable growth in artificial intelligence, its applications, and its impact on humanity. Each year we enter a new era in which generative AI and other innovative approaches shape the path toward superintelligence and singularity — phenomena that will shape the future of human civilization. The conference is both a traditional scientific forum and an academically open incubator for new, bold ideas and perspectives. In addition to artificial intelligence, this year’s conference addresses other pressing issues of our time: environmental preservation, demographic challenges, healthcare, and the transformation of social structures. The rapid development of AI offers potential solutions to many of today’s challenges and highlights the importance of collaboration among researchers, experts, and policymakers in designing sustainable strategies. We are acutely aware that we live in an era of profound change, where innovative approaches and deep knowledge are essential to creating an information society that is safe, inclusive, and sustainable. This year’s multiconference brings together twelve thematically diverse meetings reflecting the breadth and depth of the information sciences: from artificial intelligence in healthcare, demographic and family studies, and the digital transformation of nursing and digital inclusion, to research in cognitive science, healthy longevity, and education in the information society. Additional conferences include Legends of Computing and Informatics, Technology Transfer, Myths and Truths of Environmental Protection, Knowledge Discovery and Data Warehouses, and, of course, the Slovenian Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Alongside scientific papers, round tables and workshops will provide opportunities for in-depth exchanges of views, making an important contribution to shaping the future information society. Legends of Computing and Informatics serves as a national »Hall of Fame« honoring outstanding individuals in the field. We will continue to promote research and development, excellence, and collaboration. Extended papers will be published in the journal Informatica, supported by a long-standing tradition and in cooperation with academic institutions and professional associations such as ACM Slovenia, SLAIS, the Slovenian Society Informatika, and the Slovenian Academy of Engineering. Each year we recognize the most distinguished achievements. In 2025, the Michie-Turing Award for lifetime contribution to the development and promotion of the information society was awarded to Niko Schlamberger, while the Award for Research Achievement of the Year went to Tome Eftimov. The »Information Lemon« for the least appropriate information-related topic was awarded to the absence of compulsory computer science education in primary schools. The »Information Strawberry« for the best system or service in 2024/2025 was awarded to Marko Robnik Šikonja, Domen Vreš and Simon Krek together with their team, for developing the Slovenian large language model GAMS. We extend our warmest congratulations to all awardees. Our vision remains clear: to identify, seize, and shape the opportunities offered by digital transformation, and to create an information society that benefits all its members. We sincerely thank all participants for their contributions and look forward to jointly shaping the future achievements that this conference will help bring about. Mojca Ciglarič, Chair of the Program Committee Matjaž Gams, Chair of the Organizing Committee ii KONFERENČNI ODBORI CONFERENCE COMMITTEES International Programme Committee Organizing Committee Vladimir Bajic, South Africa Matjaž Gams, chair Heiner Benking, Germany Mitja Luštrek Se Woo Cheon, South Korea Lana Zemljak Howie Firth, UK Vesna Koricki Olga Fomichova, Russia Mitja Lasič Vladimir Fomichov, Russia Blaž Mahnič Vesna Hljuz Dobric, Croatia Alfred Inselberg, Israel Jay Liebowitz, USA Huan Liu, Singapore Henz Martin, Germany Marcin Paprzycki, USA Claude Sammut, Australia Jiri Wiedermann, Czech Republic Xindong Wu, USA Yiming Ye, USA Ning Zhong, USA Wray Buntine, Australia Bezalel Gavish, USA Gal A. Kaminka, Israel Mike Bain, Australia Michela Milano, Italy Derong Liu, Chicago, USA Toby Walsh, Australia Sergio Campos-Cordobes, Spain Shabnam Farahmand, Finland Sergio Crovella, Italy Programme Committee Mojca Ciglarič, chair Marjan Heričko Boštjan Vilfan Bojan Orel Borka Jerman Blažič Džonova Baldomir Zajc Franc Solina Gorazd Kandus Blaž Zupan Viljan Mahnič Urban Kordeš Boris Žemva Cene Bavec Marjan Krisper Leon Žlajpah Tomaž Kalin Andrej Kuščer Niko Zimic Jozsef Györkös Jadran Lenarčič Rok Piltaver Tadej Bajd Borut Likar Toma Strle Jaroslav Berce Janez Malačič Tine Kolenik Mojca Bernik Olga Markič Franci Pivec Marko Bohanec Dunja Mladenič Uroš Rajkovič Ivan Bratko Franc Novak Borut Batagelj Andrej Brodnik Vladislav Rajkovič Tomaž Ogrin Dušan Caf Grega Repovš Aleš Ude Saša Divjak Ivan Rozman Bojan Blažica Tomaž Erjavec Niko Schlamberger Matjaž Kljun Bogdan Filipič Gašper Slapničar Robert Blatnik Andrej Gams Stanko Strmčnik Erik Dovgan Matjaž Gams Jurij Šilc Špela Stres Mitja Luštrek Jurij Tasič Anton Gradišek Marko Grobelnik Denis Trček Nikola Guid Andrej Ule iii iv KAZALO / TABLE OF CONTENTS 18. Mednarodna konferenca o prenosu tehnologij / 18th International Technology Transfer Conference ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 PREDGOVOR / FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................... 3 PROGRAMSKI ODBORI / PROGRAMME COMMITTEES ............................................................................... 5 Innovations in patent valuation: testing Smart5 on Slovenian spin-out and start-up companies / Hafner Ana...... 7 Academic entrepreneurs in Slovenia: Entrepreneurial Competences, Intellectual Property, and Academic Culture / Hafner Ana, Kolar Janez, Lamut Urša, Dobravc Škof Karin ........................................................................ 11 University - Business Cooperation in Slovakia / Pastor Rudolf ........................................................................... 15 Developing University-Industry Cooperation through Liaison Offices in Organized Industrial Zones: The KTÜ TTC Example / Değermenci Beril, İskender Balaban Dilek, Aykut Yalçın, Ayvaz Emrah, Kalyoncu Sedanur, Yildiz İslam, Sönmez Kerim, Yilmaz Eren, Gültekin Güler Tuğba, Sağlam Gözde, Değirmenci Samet Can, Ünver Müslüm Serhat, Aydin Aleyna, Sabir Hülya, Koç Ayhan ................................................. 19 Knowledge Sharing, Protection of Trade Secrets, and Sensitive Practices in the Circular Economy / Lužar Magda ............................................................................................................................................................... 23 Self-evaluation of Research Organizations in the Field of Knowledge Transfer / Lutman Tomaž, Vindišar Jure .......................................................................................................................................................................... 27 Strengthening Knowledge and Technology Transfer Ecosystems through Transnational Collaboration: The Case of the STEIDA Project / Sabir Hülya, Kalyoncu Sedanur, Sağlam Gözde, Gültekin Güler Tuğba, Koç Ayhan, Yildiz İslam, Ünver Müslüm Serhat, Yilmaz Eren, Değermenci Beril, İskender Balaban Dilek, Ayvaz Emrah, Değirmenci Samet Can, Sönmez Kerim, Aykut Yalçın, Aydin Aleyna, Tancheva Mariana, Paunov Dimitar, Pastor Rudolf, Noskovic Jaroslav, Florjancic Urska, Blatnik Robert, Leban Marijan, Kireta Sanja, Lale Orsat, Perez Berta, Atienza Vicente, Hehn Leonie .................................................................................. 31 Evaluating Skill Development and Collaboration Outcomes in the INDUSAC Project / Kunej Špela, Odić Duško, Mrgole Urška, Trobec Marjeta ............................................................................................................ 35 Digital Persona Generation: Historical Figure Emulation in Learning / Kaliappan Velu .................................... 39 Trends in Brain-Computer Interface Technologies: Patent Analysis / Aničić Čandrlić Rahela, Jagodič Gregor 43 Indeks avtorjev / Author index ................................................................................................................... 47 v vi Zbornik 28. mednarodne multikonference INFORMACIJSKA DRUŽBA – IS 2025 Zvezek E Proceedings of the 28th International Multiconference INFORMATION SOCIETY – IS 2025 Volume E 18. Mednarodna konferenca o prenosu tehnologij 18th International Technology Transfer Conference Uredniki / Editors Duško Odić, Terezija Poženel Kovačič, Robert Blatnik http://is.ijs.si 8. oktober 2025 / 8 October 2025 Koper, Slovenia 1 2 FOREWORD Dear guests, experts, panelists, and participants, Welcome to the 18th International Technology Transfer Conference! This year, the Conference takes place in the vibrant coastal city of Koper and is hosted by the University of Primorska, serving as the meeting point for visionaries from academia, industry, and policy, all united by a shared commitment to advancing innovation and deep tech across Europe. Since its inception, the Jožef Stefan Institute has proudly served as the initiator and main organizer of this esteemed event, advancing innovation and knowledge transfer in Slovenia. This year, we are honored to host the conference in collaboration with 13 public research organizations, representing two national consortia of knowledge transfer offices (KTOs). Collaboration among KTOs, both within and across the two consortia continues through joint activities aimed at promoting KTO initiatives, raising awareness, and encouraging networking and the exchange of best practices. Over the years, this event has evolved beyond technology transfer alone. Today, it represents a broader vision of knowledge sharing, one that recognizes that innovation is not only about technology, tools, and systems that support creativity and progress, but above all, about people – people who listen, understand, and work together to meet one another’s needs and aspirations. Throughout the years, this conference has helped raise awareness, connect institutions, and co-create solutions that help researchers turn ideas into innovation. Our dialogue with ministries and research institutions has strengthened national consortia and laid the foundations for a lasting system of knowledge transfer. The conference has established itself as a crucial platform for exchanging ideas and fostering collaboration between domestic and international stakeholders, significantly contributing to the development of Slovenia’s national innovation ecosystem. As the International Technology Transfer Conference continues to gain recognition, the community of knowledge transfer professionals is likewise expanding. This growth reflects the ongoing strengthening and increasing importance of the Slovenian innovation ecosystem. We would like to express our sincere appreciation to the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation for its long-standing support of the conference and of knowledge transfer activities in general. The Ministry’s commitment to fostering connections between science and the broader social and economic landscape plays a vital role in advancing innovation and collaboration in Slovenia. This year’s conference theme, “Strengthening Spin-Out Support Systems: Bridging Research, Innovation, and Policy for a Competitive Deep Tech Europe; Enabling Research Commercialization and Sustainable Innovation through Coordinated EU and National Strategies,” aligns with our goal of bolstering the role of KTOs and improving the commercialization of intellectual property, as well as to promote the wider social relevance of knowledge transfer and the outputs and impacts of KTO work on the well-being of society as a whole. At this conference, more than one hundred entrepreneurial-minded research teams have taken part in innovation competitions. Some now lead successful spin-off companies. This outcome 3 captures our purpose - to bridge research and application, and to make science an active force in society. We therefore continue with the competition this year, presenting the Conference Prize for the Best Innovation in 2025, which aims to promote the commercialization of innovative technologies developed at public research organizations. This year, we also highlight several key dimensions of our shared journey. The WIPO Awards honor inventors and enterprises that strengthen collaboration between research and industry through the effective use of intellectual property to drive innovation and societal progress. Our roundtable discussion explores how to better connect science, research, and innovation — and align national and European funding to support this goal. As the EU prepares for its next funding framework, the conversations we begin today, on spin-out support, strategic alignment, and mission-driven innovation, will help shape the future of research commercialization and economic resilience. Meanwhile, the conference continues to grow as a platform for sharing peer-reviewed research on innovation and knowledge transfer, thanks to the dedication of our reviewers and contributors. We are excited to report that peer-reviewed contributions from researchers specializing in knowledge and technology transfer are now part of the conference for the sixth consecutive year. We are proud to have hosted distinguished speakers from renowned institutions across Europe and beyond in previous editions of the conference. This year, we are especially honored to welcome Mr. Olav Carlsen from the German Federal Agency for Breakthrough Innovation, SPRIND GmbH, who will deliver the keynote lecture. We extend our sincere gratitude to our host, the University of Primorska, as well as to all co- organizers and knowledge transfer offices for their support. Our special thanks go to the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation for co-financing the conference as part of the Science Month campaign and through the Public Call for Supporting the Activities of Knowledge Transfer Offices, co-financed by the Republic of Slovenia and the European Union via the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). Dear guests, may this conference inspire new ideas, curiosity, and collaboration, helping us move knowledge forward – for people, by people. Thank you for being part of this journey, and we look forward to an inspiring exchange of ideas at the 18ITTC. Programme Committee of the 18ITTC 4 PROGRAMSKI ODBOR / PROGRAMME COMMITTEE Mag. Robert Blatnik, Jožef Stefan Institute Peter Alešnik, University of Ljubljana Nina Smerdu, University of Maribor Dr. Tina Mesarič, University of Maribor Prof. dr. Simona Kustec, University of Primorska Izr. prof. dr. Jana Hojnik, University of Primorska Dr. Ana Hafner, Rudolfovo – Science and Technology Centre Novo mesto 5 6 Innovations in Patent Valuation: Testing SMART5 on Slovenian Spin-out and Start-up Companies Ana Hafner † Centre for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Rudolfovo – Science and Technology Centre Novo mesto Faculty of Information Studies Novo mesto ana.hafner@rudolfovo.eu Abstract commonly used, it can sometimes negatively impact the competitiveness of spin-outs [9]. In contrast, informal protection This study presents a brief review of patent valuation techniques, strategies, like maintaining trade secrets, may be more beneficial followed by a specific case study of SMART5, an online patent for competitiveness in certain contexts [9]. evaluation service. SMART5 was tested on U.S. and European patents of eight successful Slovenian firms that had previously This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on patent valuation been start-up companies, four of which originated as spin-outs methods by presenting an empirical test of SMART5 applied to from universities or public research institutes. The results show the patents of eight Slovenian start-ups, four of which are that SMART5 is a reliable and attractive tool; however, some university or PRO spin-outs. By combining a short review of improvements are needed, particularly regarding the existing valuation techniques with a critical assessment of transparency of its scoring methodology and the evaluation of SMART5’s performance, the study highlights both the potential patents belonging to the same family, where the system yields and the limitations of automated patent evaluation tools. In doing conflicting results for identical inventions. so, it provides insights into how such tools could be further Keywords practitioners and technology transfer staff. improved to better serve the needs of innovative enterprises, IP IP valuation, patent valuation, SMART5, quantitative valuation, spin-out/start-up enterprises 2 Patent valuation techniques 1 Introduction qualitative and quantitative approaches. Qualitative methods Patent valuation techniques can broadly be grouped into The valuation of patents has become an increasingly important have interpretative and subjective nature and they attempt to field of research and practice, as intellectual property (IP) is now determine patent value by understanding the processes and the widely recognized as a critical driver of innovation, behavioural patterns [3]. They often include expert judgment [6]. competitiveness, and economic growth. Start-up companies and Quantitative methods, on the other hand, attempt to measure university spin-outs in particular rely heavily on patents not only patent value using economic frameworks. These include cost- to protect their technological advancements but also to attract based approaches, which estimate the resources required to investment, secure partnerships, and strengthen their market develop and protect the invention; market-based approaches, position. Yet, despite the growing strategic significance of which rely on comparable patent transactions or licensing deals; patents, their valuation remains a complex task. and income-based approaches, which calculate expected future cash flows derived from exploiting the patent [1, 12, 13]. Universities or other public research institutions’ (PROs) spin- out companies are typically formed to commercialize intellectual A classification of methods for patent valuation as analysed by property (IP) generated within these academic institutions. Here Munari and Oriani [7] is presented on Figure 1. patents often play a central role in this process. The creation and success of these spin-outs are closely linked to how universities and PROs manage and protect their IP, especially through formal mechanisms like patents and trademarks. However, research indicates that while formal IP protection (such as patents) is †Corresponding author Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Figure 1: A classification of methods for patent valuation, source [7] 7 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia A. Hafner We will focus only on quantitative non-monetary methods, i.e., information extracted from patent specification, bibliographic patent indicators. Typical indicators are legal status, international information, and administrative information”, as claimed by and technological scope, number of forward citations and the owner and developer KIPA. It is not very clear, at least from the existence of opposition and litigation [7]. Such valuation has documents translated in English, what does the number “5” mean many advantages: the method is fast, objective and inexpensive in the name. The “5” may refer to a software version (like the 5th and can be fully automated once the valuation system is set up release) or maybe to the five (broad) evaluation dimensions that [7]. International scope (size of patent family) and forward the system applies when assessing patents. citations (citations received from patents applied later) are probably the most frequent measures for assessing patent value. The system is designed to objectively evaluate a patent across For example, patent valuation using forward citations has been different countries using a combination of patent specifications, increasingly used by practitioners when a patent’s value has not bibliographic information, application information, examination been otherwise established [10]. Og et al. [8] divide patent value information, information about litigations, licences, changes of indicators into ex-ante indicators (family size, backward ownership, citations and patent family information. SMART5 citations, backward references to non-patent literature, number emphasizes a data-driven scoring system grounded in patent of claims, and number of inventors) and ex-post indicators documentation rather than subjective expert opinion alone. It (forward citations). Such indicators can be further integrated into supports evaluation for patents registered in China, Europe indexes, composite measures that can combine multiple (European patent), Japan, Korea, and the United States. indicators into a single value. Grimaldi and Cricelli [4] in their paper “Indexes of Patent Value: A Systematic Literature Review and Classification” identified even 37 different indexes. Despite the variety of available methods, no single approach offers a universally accepted or comprehensive solution. Traditional valuation models often face limitations when applied to early-stage companies. Valuing patents in start-ups presents unique challenges due to limited financial history, uncertain market prospects, and evolving technologies. As a result, traditional valuation models often require adaptation or supplementation [2]. In response to various challenges connected to patent valuation – along with a lengthy and complex assessment – SMART5 was developed under the auspices of the Korea Invention Promotion Association (KIPA) and offers an online platform for patent Figure 2: Patent evaluation model, source [15] evaluation where each patent can be evaluated in some seconds. The system claims to “objectively evaluate the superiority of a SMART5 was first launched already in 2010 and it has processed patent in different countries” by leveraging patent specifications, approximately 1.7 million evaluations (up to 2023) and has bibliographic information, and administrative data [14]. By emerged as a leading patent evaluation system in South Korea, transforming bibliometric indicators into comparative scores, taking the forefront in popularizing patent assessment [16]. SMART5 aims to provide accessible and standardized insights However, SMART5 is not known in Slovenia and it was first into patent quality across jurisdictions. presented on the IP Valuation Workshop in Ljubljana in June While such automated evaluation systems hold considerable transfer professionals. KIPA kindly provided us with possibility 2025 [11] and it has received a lot of interest from technology promise for reducing information asymmetries and enhancing to test 10 patents free of charge. decision-making, they must be rigorously tested for reliability, transparency, and contextual relevance. This is particularly important for research-based spin-outs and start-ups, which often 4 Method operate with limited resources and for whom misleading or During August 2025 we tested SMART5 on ten patents from inconsistent patent assessments may have serious strategic eight different patent families from eight Slovenian start-up or consequences. universities or other PROs spin-out companies. Start-up enterprises were selected from enterprises which received 3 support of Slovenian Enterprise Fund – Tender P2 – which is a About SMART5 To illustrate how patent evaluation systems can support enterprises [17]. PROs spin-outs were selected from the online grant intended to co-finance the setting up of innovative innovation and technology transfer, this chapter introduces news and university websites such as University of Ljubljana SMART5 with a brief overview of its purpose, methodology and presentation of their spin outs [18]. application. SMART5 [14, 15] is an acronym for System to Measure, Analyse and Rate patent Technology. It is an online The basic criteria for the selected patents were, that they are not patent evaluation service in which the “superiority of a patent in “too young and too old”. With not “too young” we mean patents different countries is objectively evaluated using patent 8 Innovations in patent valuation: testing SMART5 on Slovenian Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia spin-out and start-up companies which are more than five years old, and they are applied and EP2868662 2013 Spin-out A medium already granted outside Slovenia. With not “too old” we mean (A1) that patens are still maintained. EP3197906 2014 Spin-out BBB micro (A1) Two patent families from our spin-outs were tested with different EP3001203 2014 Start-up B micro patents within the same family – one applied in Europe and the (A1) other in the U.S. Since a “patent family” presents the same (A1) EP3153246 2015 Spin-out AA micro patent, applied in different jurisdictions, we were interested, will EP3711147 2017 Spin-out BB medium SMART5 recognize the same patents and evaluate them equally. (A1) SMART5 evaluates patents based on three core aspects: IP Seven (five) patents received a grade of A, AA, BB, or BBB Rights valuation – legal strength and enforceability of the patent; which is according to SMART5 above-average to strong quality. Technology valuation – the technical sophistication and Only one patent received score CCC, standing out as innovativeness of the invention; and Usability valuation – the significantly weaker. It should be noted that this patent belongs potential for practical application and commercialization of the to an enterprise that already holds around 20 different patent patent [15]. These grades are in the end summarized in one families, and it may have been a coincidence that our sample overall grade of a patent which can receive a hierarchical grade included one of the weakest patents from its portfolio. By from AAA (the highest grade) to C (the lowest grade) as contrast, a micro start-up with only a single patent family presented on the Figure 3. received an A grade for its U.S. patent. It can therefore be argued that the overall quality of a company’s patent portfolio cannot be inferred from a single evaluation result, especially when the portfolio is large and heterogeneous. Larger enterprises may hold a mix of both strong and weak patents, depending on the stage of development, research focus, and patenting strategy. Conversely, for very small firms or start-ups, even one patent can represent the core of their business model, and thus its evaluation result is highly consequential. This highlights the importance of interpreting SMART5 results not only at the level of individual Figure 3: SMART5 evaluation grades, source [15] patents but also within the broader context of portfolio structure and company strategy. 5 Results Most importantly, the scores generally align with expectations We can confirm that SMART5 offers several clear strengths that based on the technological and legal aspects of these specific make it an attractive tool for patent evaluation. The results are patents, which indicates that the tool captures meaningful aspects presented in a clear and user-friendly way, with well-structured of patent quality. These features demonstrate that SMART5 has grades and visualizations that allow even non-specialists to considerable value as a first-level screening and benchmarking quickly grasp the relative strength of a patent. The interface and instrument, capable of guiding companies and IP professionals design are intuitive, supporting ease of use even for small toward more informed decision-making. companies which may lack in-house IP expertise. However, from the Table 1 we cannot see evidence of influence Our results are listed in the Table 1. It is also important to note of quality of patent to the present size of enterprise. Micro firms that the patents were filed in the past, while the company size have patents graded from AA (very strong) to B (solid) what reflects the present data. shows that even the smallest firms can secure relatively strong patents. At the same time medium sized firms showed mixed Table 1: Results of testing SMART5 performance, ranging from CCC (weak) to A (strong). Of course, this might be a consequence of a small sample size. Patent no. Priority Company Grade Company date Among the tested cases, two patents (marked with blue and green size US2016194054 colour) belong to the same patent family (parallel filings of the 2013 Start-up A micro (A1) same invention in different jurisdictions). Ideally, such patents US2020395832 2017 Spin-out CCC medium should receive identical grades, because their technical content, (A1) inventive step, and core claims are essentially the same. Minor US2016134220 2013 Start-up AA small differences may occur due to jurisdiction-specific citation (A1) practices, examiner reports, or legal events, but these should not US2017100755 2015 Spin-out A micro result in substantial differences in the overall valuation. (A1) US2021068752 2019 Start-up B medium (A1) 9 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia A. Hafner 6 Discussion and Conclusion portfolios against competitors across jurisdictions, identify relative strengths, and detect areas where additional IP strategy Some previous studies already tested SMART5. For example, development might be necessary. With targeted improvements, study of Lee, Jeong, and Kong [5] examines determinants of SMART5 could evolve into a more robust and widely adopted successful technology commercialization. It focuses on 883 U.S. instrument for patent evaluation in both academic and private- patents issued in 2020 that originated from government-funded sector innovation ecosystems. With inclusion of artificial R&D in South Korea. The key aim of the study was to understand intelligence, occupations such as expert for patent valuation, may which patent-related characteristics contribute to revenue become obsolete. We believe that this can happen in the next generation through licensing and transfers. Among the variables three years. analysed, the study highlights SMART5 scores as a central qualitative indicator. In statistical tests (linear and logistic regression), the SMART5 grade emerged as the only variable Acknowledgments with a statistically significant positive impact on technology Author acknowledges that this research was supported by the commercialization outcomes. project KTO3 funded under the Call for Proposals to support the activities of Knowledge Transfer Offices (JR KTO). Of course, our sample was very small, therefore we found no evidence of correlation with commercialisation outcomes References (translated into our study we may have predicted that start-ups which had more valuable patents in the past are now larger firms [1] Martin A Bader and Frauke Rüether. Still A Long Way To Value-Based Patent Valuation. with more employees and more revenue). Because of small [2] Aysun Beyazkilic Koc and Nihan Yildirim. 2023. A multi-criteria decision sample size, we cannot conclude anything except that SMART5 framework for IP valuation method selection: “Valuation case” matters. World Patent Information 73, (June 2023), 102176. is an attractive tool for patent evaluation. For technology transfer https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2023.102176 professionals, the system may provide structured, evidence- [3] Nil Girgin Kalıp, Yaman Ömer Erzurumlu, and Nur Asena Gün. 2022. based evaluations that support better patent portfolio Qualitative and quantitative patent valuation methods: A systematic literature review. World Patent Information 69, (June 2022), 102111. management, stronger industry confidence, and higher https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2022.102111 commercialization potential. [4] Michele Grimaldi, Livio Cricelli, Martina Di Giovanni, and Francesco Rogo. 2015. The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to However, SMART5 has two disturbing issues. leverage patent information for strategic technology planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 94, (May 2015), 286–302. First, if a user of the system wants to find more information about https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.10.013 [5] Jaeheon Lee, Myoungsun Jeong, and Heejung Kong. 2024. Qualitative how scores and how the final score are calculated, what specific factors of patents affecting technology commercialization in 2020: An indicators are taken and how are they weighted, there are not analysis of U.S. registered patents. Journal of Intellectual Property 19, 3 many available information – at least not in English. So, while (September 2024), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.34122/JIP.2024.19.3.111 [6] Pineda Martinez and Katherine Michelle. 2025. Strategic patent portfolio SMART5 provides clear numerical indicators of patent quality management : an expert-based framework for IP value assessment. (2025). and market relevance, the underlying algorithms and weightings Retrieved August 23, 2025 from https://lutpub.lut.fi/handle/10024/169544 [7] Federico Munari and Raffaele Oriani. 2011. The Economic Valuation of used in the evaluation remain largely undisclosed. This lack of Patents: Methods and Applications. Edward Elgar Publishing. transparency can limit user trust and also raises questions about [8] Joo Young Og, Krzysztof Pawelec, Byung-Keun Kim, Rafal Paprocki, and the value of SMART5 for technology transfer offices: if it is EuiSeob Jeong. 2020. Measuring Patent Value Indicators with Patent Renewal Information. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, better at assessing the impact of a patent that is already well and Complexity 6, 1 (March 2020), 16. established and widely cited than at evaluating an initial patent https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6010016 [9] Aurora A. C. Teixeira and Cátia Ferreira. 2019. Intellectual property rights application, then it is more useful as a tool for monitoring and and the competitiveness of academic spin-offs. Journal of Innovation & demonstrating the value of mature patents rather than for making Knowledge 4, 3 (July 2019), 154–161. early-stage decisions about which patent applications to [10] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2018.12.002 Dan Werner and Huy Dang. 2021. Patent Valuation Using Citations: A prioritize. However, it might also be reasonable that KIPA is Review and Sensitivity Analysis. Journal of Business Valuation and keeping the methodology as a business secret. Economic Loss Analysis 16, 1 (February 2021), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1515/jbvela-2020-0025 Second, in the SMART5 evaluation, we observed inconsistent [11] 2025. Slovenia launches international workshop to open discussion on intellectual property valuation | GOV.SI. Portal GOV.SI. Retrieved grading of patent family members. It seems from our two cases August 24, 2025 from https://www.gov.si/en/news/2025-06-18-slovenia- that European patents automatically get a higher grade than those launches-international-workshop-to-open-discussion-on-intellectual- property-valuation/ from the U.S. This inconsistency can be interpreted in two ways: [12] Valuing Intellectual Property Assets. business. Retrieved August 23, 2025 1) Algorithmic sensitivity to jurisdictional data: SMART5 may from https://www.wipo.int/web/business/ip-valuation weigh bibliographic and administrative data differently across [13] ip_panorama_11_learning_points.pdf. Retrieved August 23, 2025 from https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/sme/en/documents/pdf/ip_panora jurisdictions (e.g., USPTO vs. EPO citation patterns, costs of ma_11_learning_points.pdf patent or procedural timelines). This could lead to artificially [14] Overview of SMART5. Retrieved August 21, 2025 from https://smart.kipa.org/intro/summary.do?lang=en_US divergent results for otherwise equivalent inventions. 2) Lack of [15] SMART5_EN.pdf. Retrieved August 21, 2025 from family-level normalization: SMART5 appears to evaluate each https://www.kipa.org/_res/kipa/etc/SMART5_EN.pdf filing in isolation, without consolidating information across the [16] Korea Invention Promotion Association(KIPA). Retrieved August 24, 2025 from patent family. In practice, this risks misrepresenting the value of https://www.kipa.org/eng/ip_business.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com an invention, since a strong patent family can be unfairly [17] Financial incentive P2 (grant). StartupPlusProgram. Retrieved August 24, 2025 from https://startup-plus.podjetniskisklad.si/en/p2/ weakened by one low score, or vice versa. [18] Odcepljena podjetja. Univerza v Ljubljani. Retrieved August 24, 2025 Despite these limitations, the application of SMART5 to from https://www.uni-lj.si/raziskovanje/inovacije-in-prenos- znanja/odcepljena-podjetja Slovenian start-ups/spin-outs demonstrated its usefulness as a benchmarking tool. It allows companies to compare their patent 10 Academic Entrepreneurs in Slovenia: Entrepreneurial Competences, Intellectual Property, and Academic Culture Ana Hafner† Janez Kolar Urša Lamut Karin Dobravc Škof Centre for Technology Transfer Centre for Technology Transfer Centre for Technology Transfer Centre for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property and Intellectual Property and Intellectual Property and Intellectual Property Rudolfovo - Science and Rudolfovo - Science and Rudolfovo - Science and Rudolfovo - Science and Technology Centre Novo mesto and Technology Centre Novo mesto Technology Centre Novo mesto Technology Centre Novo mesto Faculty of Information Studies janez.kolar@rudolfovo.eu ursa.lamut@rudolfovo.eu karin.dobravc.skof@rudolfovo.eu ana.hafner@rudolfovo.eu Abstract Our research question is: how do Slovenian academic entrepreneurs in the natural and technical sciences acquire Academic entrepreneurship is a key channel for linking research entrepreneurial competences, use intellectual property, and and economic development, yet little is known about its perceive the entrepreneurial culture in their academic dynamics in smaller national innovation systems. Based on in- environment? depth interviews with the founders of three internationally Previous studies on academic entrepreneurship have shown that successful Slovenian spin-out enterprises, we examine how do institutional culture, resource availability, and the presence of sciences acquire entrepreneurial competences, use intellectual entrepreneurship, but their influence can vary by context. For property, and perceive the entrepreneurial culture in their example, in Brazil, institutional initiatives had limited direct Slovenian academic entrepreneurs in the natural and technical role models play important roles in shaping academic academic environment. Although their academic backgrounds impact on academic entrepreneurship, suggesting some level of are rooted in highly technical fields, our findings reveal that these ineffectiveness in initiatives aiming at promoting academic founders have engaged extensively in entrepreneurial learning, entrepreneurship in Brazilian universities [6] while study in management and intellectual property, acquiring knowledge and China highlights that supportive university environment and skills far beyond their original scientific expertise. They favourable government policies significantly enhance emphasise the importance of patents and intellectual property entrepreneurial intentions [1]. rights knowledge, however, intellectual property is not viewed Academic entrepreneurs more likely engage in commercial merely as a legal safeguard but as a strategic resource for activities such as founding or advising companies compared to signalling credibility and positioning firms at different growth their non-entrepreneurial peers. Ding and Choi [4] showed that stages. At the same time, they express a critical perspective on founding activity occurred earlier during a scientist's career than the prevailing entrepreneurial culture within Slovenian academia, advising and that factors such as gender, research productivity, which they perceive as underdeveloped, contrasting it with more social networks and employer characteristics also play important supportive environments abroad. roles. Academic entrepreneurs often develop a dual identity, Keywords balancing their roles as scientists and entrepreneurs [3] and the interaction between scientific and entrepreneurial identities can Academic entrepreneurs, spin-outs, academic entrepreneurship, strengthen the intention to engage in entrepreneurship: academic intellectual property, patents, entrepreneurial competences entrepreneurs who are also “hybrid scientists” can positively promote the development of the firms’ knowledge breadth, and the “hybrid entrepreneurs” deepen the knowledge depth of 1 Introduction academic start-ups. Academic entrepreneurs with prior business Academic entrepreneurship is often defined as the direct ownership experience had broader social networks and were involvement of academicians in valorising research results in the more effective in developing network ties while less experienced market, often through the creation of new firms or academic spin- entrepreneurs likely encounter structural holes between their offs [14]. This process has gained increasing attention in recent scientific research networks and industry networks [11]. decades, but in smaller countries such as Slovenia, where the International mobility experiences further differentiate academic institutional setting is less developed and the number of cases is entrepreneurs, as returnees with international exposure are more limited, the dynamics of academic entrepreneurship are not yet than 50% more likely to become academic entrepreneurs than well understood. those who have not worked abroad [12]. Our study draws on in-depth interviews with the founders of three internationally successful Slovenian spin-out enterprises to †Corresponding author examine how academic entrepreneurs from the natural and Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or technical sciences acquire and integrate entrepreneurial classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed competencies into their professional trajectories. We explore the for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full ways in which they engage with entrepreneurial learning, citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). management practices, and intellectual property rights, as well as Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia their critical views on the prevailing entrepreneurial culture © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). within Slovenian academia. By analysing these cases, we aim to contribute to four strands of literature: (1) the study of academic 11 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia A. Hafner et al. entrepreneurship in smaller, less-researched national systems; 3 Results (2) the understanding of how technical and scientific expertise is From Table 1 we can see that two companies are now 20 years complemented by non-technical competencies in successful old while one is more than 10 years younger. The two older spin- spin-out ventures; and (3) the examination of the role of outs have significantly more registered industrial property as intellectual property for spin-out (start-up) enterprises. well as they have more employees. It is very interesting that all our respondents have bachelor’s 2 degree from physics, however, two of them later specialized in Methodology another fields. For example, R1 graduated in astrophysics, but, This study employs a qualitative research design. Given the as he explained, he had always wanted to do something more complexity of individual decision-making processes, an in-depth practical. This is why he decided to pursue a master’s degree in interview approach is well-suited to uncover nuanced electrical engineering. perspectives that may not be evident in quantitative studies. This One of the reasons of spin- out’s success was founders' approach ena bles us to delve into the participants’ experiences, willingness to receive additional education in entrepreneurship motivations, and perceptions regarding entrepreneurship, and intellectual property, before and/or after founding the intellectual property and innovation management. company. After finishing his PhD from physics, R3 also The study focuses on three top Slovenian spin-outs which completed MBA study with the highest grades. R2 describes: successfully sell their products internationally, and they are also “When I started, I didn’t have any knowledge about how to be a well known to the wider Slovenian public. Companies had to manager. Then I began educating myself a little, and I basically meet the following criteria: internalized that the most important thing is the team – how you - their founders were employed at universities/ PROs before they hold the team together, what you have to do? /…/ How do you founded a start-up, make sure that everyone is motivated, that you figure out what - they sell scientifically based product or services, i.e., they are each person is best at, and place them exactly there so that they deep tech companies, feel the most comfortable? These are the kinds of skills that are - they are international companies: their market is extended very important, especially in small companies.” R1 explains: outside Slovenia, “Here, I would like to praise our supportive environment. The - they are older than five years. technology park organized a bunch of workshops, as did the Additional characteristics of companies are presented in Table 1. business incubator, so I was somehow “infected” with these /entrepreneurial/ things, but I was also proactive. This also Table 1: Properties of spin-out companies applies to my master’s studies. I arranged my electrical engineering program in such a way that I also took the R1 Innovation Management course at the Faculty of Economics /…/ R2 R3 Year of So I switched from physics to electrical engineering, but I set it 2006 2017 2005 foundation up in a rather interdisciplinary way.” R2 also attended several Number of 20 0 (owners 5 management and entrepreneurial lectures at the university patent families of a patent incubator. R1 also took World Intellectual Property are Organization’s Distance Learning courses from intellectual founders/ property (IP): “…so I would also advise all researchers institute) interested in technology to simply be proactive and to also take Number of 3 1 20 trademarks advantage of online courses and various workshops and Number of participate in them. It’s not about how much they will gain from 100 - 200 1 - 10 200 - 300 employees the content itself, but primarily it will stimulate their thinking and Company’s size Medium sized Micro Large make it easier for them to understand something on their own company company company later.” Educational Physics, Physics, Physics IP is very important for our respondents, but not only in the background of electrotechnics chemistry “classical” sense, such as the legal protection of patents or founder trademarks as a means of achieving market exclusivity. Rather it is understood in a broader, more strategic sense. Respondents Patents were obtained from Espacenet database, while emphasized its role in shaping competitive advantage, trademarks from TM View database. facilitating collaboration with external partners, and signalling July 2025, lasting between 60 and 90 minutes. All interviews functions less as an offensive mechanism and more as an active were audio-recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim for resource within innovation processes and organizational Interviews were held either face-to-face or online in June and credibility to investors and stakeholders. In this perspective, IP analysis. strategy. R1 claimed: “We know for sure that some larger We applied thematic analysis, which involved the following companies potentially infringe our patents. But that doesn’t steps: transcription, independent coding by two researchers to necessarily mean that we will react to it. This is because a patent ensure data validity, identification of recurring themes, and has a specific purpose, and in the industry it has a certain value interpretation of findings. that you add. And it’s not necessarily about wanting to block others who are doing something similar. So yes, a patent does not necessarily have an offensive role.” R3 explained: “I would 12 Academic Entrepreneurs in Slovenia: Entrepreneurial Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Competences, Intellectual Property, and Academic Culture say that patent is one of the defensive mechanisms. Just like a it give professors the highest rating? That means students go to trademark is a defensive mechanism against competition. We the professor who is the most successful – not academically, but want to compete, we want to beat the competition. How will we entrepreneurially. Because this way they ensure, let’s say, good beat them? With quality? Certainly. With price? No. /…/ We conditions for life and for interesting research. We don’t have achieve that through other elements: quality, brand, reputation yet these traditions and experiences in Europe. But it’s not as such. If patents or regulatory protections are part of that forbidden. I believe the legislation is not particularly unfriendly brand, then yes. If we are producing medical products, they must to this. It’s just that people need to start doing it. The more good be certified. That is quite demanding. But once we have stories are there, the more it will happen naturally on its own.” certification, we know the competition will need two years, not R2 agrees: “The US has significantly more spin-outs than only to copy us but also to go through that same process. In short, Europe. Europe is very diverse. In some countries, there is that’s it. One of these defensive mechanisms.” R2 believes that enough support and a lot of startups. In others, there is less – for patents may enhance the company’s reputation and gain the trust example, in Croatia, there are already more startups than in of customers: “Patents are very important because people ask Slovenia. We are very poor here.” you whether you have patented something. And if you say yes, Our respondents were very critical to basic academic then that’s it. They feel safe, because someone has reviewed it requirements, such as excessive publishing and metrics tracked and confirmed that it is truly an invention.” R1 emphasized that by academic institutions. R2 said: “What really annoys me are patents are very important for attracting investors: “Without this, these articles with a huge number of authors, and in most cases, it is completely impossible to gain either a customer or an people are just listed there. I am not listed on any such article, investor, because, of course, the customer needs to be protected because I don’t want to be listed if I didn’t read it and participate in order to use your technology. The same goes for the investor.” in it. No, this is pointless to me, because if someone tells me they How you use IP, also depends on the size of a company. R1 have 50 articles per a year – I say, just don’t try to fool me!” To explained: “For example, if you are a small company, you have encourage more spin-outs, R3 believes, the achievements should a patent so that you can show others that you have it and that this be equivalently rewarded, both academic and entrepreneurial: makes you worth something. It also protects your customers, “The reward and reputation should be equivalent, or you do pure since someone bigger cannot just use protected technology. If basic science and publish articles, or you start a company. /…/ I you are a medium-sized company, say with a few hundred or think I have enough knowledge, experience, and everything to be thousand employees, then you have patents in order to defend a professor and teach. However, the system does not allow me to yourself against the large players. When you step on their toes be a university professor, because I do not meet the requirements and capture a share of the market, they start putting pressure on for habilitation.” R3 concluded: “Here in science, for example, you. And if you are a very large company, then you have patents where I am, the professors have a secure academic job and on to secure and prolong your monopolistic position for some time. top of that they also have some extra private business and have So, it depends on the role you are in. But as a small company, of a good time. And this is fine. With that money they can buy a course, it is very useful to have patents. At the same time, I am Mercedes, a yacht and a weekend house. And that's it. But aware that patents come with costs, which means you cannot wouldn't it be better if this professor would use this knowledge have an unlimited number of them. Writing patents is also not and created a company where he could employ 100 people, and easy. Obtaining them involves lengthy procedures, including they all would earn so much that each of them could buy a abroad. You need a patent attorney to handle communication Mercedes, a yacht and a weekend house?” with patent examiners, and these are things that cost money.” R3 concluded: “I think we should patent more. We are still learning, and I am also to blame, so in a way I am criticizing myself. But I 4 Discussion and Conclusion think that our culture is too scientific. We tend to believe that if Our study highlights the critical role of spin-out founders’ we have done something, it is nothing special. I should have proactive learning and entrepreneurial education in the success patented every little thing. When I look at American companies, of spin-out companies. Our respondents consistently emphasized they patent every little stupid thing.” that formal and informal education in entrepreneurship, How supportive are Slovenian academic institutions toward management, innovation, and IP provided them with essential entrepreneurship? R2 explained: “Though I had very good skills to build and lead effective teams. For instance, R2 experiences at my institute, and I think others do as well, there described the importance of understanding team dynamics, are also objective obstacles. For example, there is this new law highlighting the significance of human capital management in – or rather, it’s already a few years old. It does state that public small companies, while R1 and R3 actively sought institutions can be co-owners of spin-outs, but in reality this interdisciplinary knowledge through structured courses, doesn’t happen because there are no implementing regulations. workshops, and online programs, demonstrating that continuous /…/ For example, when I go abroad, I know some companies that learning fosters both confidence and competence in are spin-outs (where public institution is a co-owner). Portugal entrepreneurial endeavours. These findings align with prior is very good with these small companies and startups, and I research emphasizing the value of absorptive capacity in asked them do they have to pay a rent when they had a sit at their entrepreneurial education [9] and continuous learning and skill institute, they were surprised: ‘How do you pay rent, what kind development in technology-based entrepreneurship [2, 10]. of rent?’” Academic founders must acquire competencies in R1 believes that “in USA there is now significantly more (spin- entrepreneurship, management, and IP that go far beyond their out) tradition. This is something that is taken for granted. Does original disciplinary expertise. The ability to navigate these 13 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia A. Hafner et al. domains is particularly important in environments where the Dobravc Škof and Kolar gratefully acknowledge the research entrepreneurial culture within academia is underdeveloped or was co-funded by the Slovenian Research and Innovation where institutional support for commercialization is limited. Agency (ARIS) through the annual work program of Rudolfovo. Intellectual property emerged as a multifaceted strategic resource rather than merely a legal instrument for market exclusivity. References Respondents consistently described patents and trademarks as [1] Muhammad Sibt e Ali and Furrukh Bashir. 2024. The Role of defensive mechanisms, tools for signalling credibility to Individual Resource Capital, University Support Environment and investors and safeguards for customer trust. Our respondents Government Policy in Academic Entrepreneurship: Evidence from China. Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 12, 1 recognized that IP strategy is context-dependent, varying with (March 2024), 645 – 664. company size and market position. Small firms use patents to https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhss.2024.v12i1.2111 establish legitimacy and protect customers, medium-sized firms [2] Margherita Bacigalupo. 2021. Entrepreneurship as a competence. use them defensively against larger competitors, and large firms In World Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing, 186 – 189. Retrieved August 16, 2025 from leverage them to maintain monopolistic advantages. Some of https://www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap/edcoll/9781839104138/97 these insights are supported by previous research: small firms 81839104138.00030.xml often use patents to attract customers and venture capital, so [3] Yuanyuan Chen, Wei Liu, Stavros Sindakis, and Sakshi Aggarwal. patenting has an important role to play even in firms where the 2024. Transferring Scientific Knowledge to Academic Startups: the protective function of patents is secondary [7]. Huges and Mina Moderating Effect of the Dual Identity of Academic Entrepreneurs on Forming Knowledge Depth and Knowledge Breadth. J Knowl [8] also showed that an increasingly important factor for high Econ 15, 1 (March 2024), 1823–1844. tech small firms is the role of patents in obtaining financial https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01110-5 backing by venture capitalists. [4] Waverly Ding and Emily Choi. 2011. Divergent paths to However, respondents also highlighted cultural and structural commercial science: A comparison of scientists’ founding and challenges in patenting and entrepreneurship. R3 noted that https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.011 advising activities. Research Policy 40, 1 (February 2011), 69–80. European research culture tends to undervalue the [5] Joanne Duberley, Laurie Cohen, and Elspeth Leeson. 2007. commercialization of inventions, and that many innovations Entrepreneurial Academics: Developing Scientific Careers in remain unpatented due to overly academic mindsets or other Changing University Settings. Higher Education Quarterly 61, 4 obstacles. R2 and R1 pointed to the uneven institutional support 2273.2007.00368.x (2007), 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-across European countries, contrasting the US and Portugal with [6] Bruno Brandão Fischer, Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Slovenia, where regulatory ambiguity hinder spin-out formation. Moraes, and Paola Rücker Schaeffer. 2019. Universities’ These findings suggest that supportive policy frameworks and a institutional settings and academic entrepreneurship: Notes from a developing country. Technological Forecasting and Social Change culture that values entrepreneurship are critical for translating 147, (October 2019), 243 – 252. scientific research into commercial ventures. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.07.009 The study also revealed tension between academic values and [7] Marcus Holgersson. 2013. Patent management in entrepreneurial entrepreneurial incentives. Respondents criticized the SMEs: a literature review and an empirical study of innovation overemphasis on publication metrics and authorship inflation, appropriation, patent propensity, and motives. R&D Management 43, 1 (2013), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- arguing that current academic reward systems insufficiently 9310.2012.00700.x recognize entrepreneurial achievements. R3 emphasized the [8] Alan Hughes and Andrea Mina. THE IMPACT OF THE PATENT need for equivalently rewarding scientific and entrepreneurial SYSTEM ON SMEs. paths. This echoes broader debates in higher education policy [9] Minjung Kim and Min Jae Park. 2023. Absorptive capacity in entrepreneurial education: Rethinking the Kolb’s experiential regarding the balance between research excellence and learning theory. The International Journal of Management technology transfer [5]. Additionally, here we can add critics of Education 21, 3 (November 2023), 100873. higher educational system who claim that universities are too https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100873 bureaucratic, they educate mainly 'job seekers', they suffer from [10] Lahcene Makhloufi, Abderrazak Ahmed Laghouag, Alhussain Ali decreasing number of science and technology students and are Orientation on Innovation Capability: The Mediating Role of Sahli, and Fateh Belaid. 2021. Impact of Entrepreneurial weak at technology transfer [13]. Absorptive Capability and Organizational Learning Capabilities. In conclusion, academic entrepreneurs who succeeded in Sustainability 13, 10 (January 2021), 5399. Slovenia, demonstrate a greater willingness to step outside the https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105399 [11] Simon Mosey and Mike Wright. 2007. From Human Capital to boundaries of traditional research roles (shaped by discoveries Social Capital: A Longitudinal Study of Technology – Based and publications), proactively acquire managerial and legal Academic Entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice knowledge, and engage with external stakeholders such as 31, 6 (November 2007), 909–935. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- incubators, investors, patent attorneys and customers. They 6520.2007.00203.x [12] Wolf-Hendrik Uhlbach, Valentina Tartari, and Hans Christian perceive intellectual property not only as a legal safeguard but as Kongsted. 2022. Beyond scientific excellence: International a strategic asset that enhances credibility, facilitates partnerships, mobility and the entrepreneurial activities of academic scientists. and supports long-term competitiveness. Research Policy 51, 1 (January 2022), 104401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104401 Acknowledgments [13] Tsvi G. Vinig. 2007. Scientists are Entrepreneurs so Why Universities are Not Entrepreneurial? Retrieved August 16, 2025 Hafner and Lamut gratefully acknowledge CRP - Podpora IL from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1020580 project (https://www.rudolfovo.eu/en/nacionalni-projekti/crp- [14] Alessandra Micozzi. 2020. Academic Entrepreneurship. In The il%3A-) co-funded by Ministry for Higher Education, Science Entrepreneurial Dynamics in Italy: A Focus on Academic Spin- Offs, Alessandra Micozzi (ed.). Springer International Publishing, and Innovation (MVZI) and Slovenian Research and Innovation Cham, 43–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55183-4_2 Agency (ARIS). 14 University - Business Cooperation in Slovakia Rudolf Pástor† Department of International Cooperation, Slovak Centre of Scientific and Technical Information, Bratislava/Slovakia rudolf.pastor@cvtisr.sk Abstract scope of STEIDA (Strengthening Technology Transfer Ecosystem through Innovative and Digital Approaches) This paper contributes to our understanding of the project, ref. № 2023-1-TR01-KA220-HED-000157242. university-business cooperation in Slovakia. We have The project, which is funded under the “ERASMUS + assessed university-business cooperation activities on the programme”, aims to strengthen the technology transfer example of the case studies of 2 Slovak universities – Pavol ecosystem through an innovative and holistic approach Jozef Šafárik University in Košice and Slovak University of which will foster national and international collaboration Technology in Bratislava. The paper is based on the among HEIs, academics, businesses, students, entrepreneurs qualitative research provided in frame of the STEIDA project and other stakeholders by developing/using digital under the Erasmus+ program, with the aim to strengthen platforms and networks. This objective will be achieved technology transfer ecosystem through an innovative and through the implementation of the following main activities: holistic approach. The output of this research was included - Conducting a comprehensive study on the technol- as the “Best Practices in Technology Transfer Ecosystem in ogy transfer ecosystem; Slovakia.” - Compilation of a report on best practices in technol- ogy transfer; Keywords - Development of a curriculum for higher education Technology transfer, university, business, cooperation, institutions and students; innovation ecosystem - Development of training modules for technology transfer professionals and newcomers; - Conducting pilot training for building the capacity 1 of technology transfer professionals/newcom- Introduction ers/students; University-Business Cooperation (UBC) is a relationship in - Development of digital platform for cooperation flux, reflecting issues of transition from an industrial to a between actors in the technology transfer ecosys- knowledge society. UBC links are no longer confined to a tem. relatively small academic sector, leaving most of the academy untouched, but have expanded from engineering and The present paper of 2 best practices from Slovakia has been medicine to the social sciences and the arts [1]. developed in parallel with the Research on Best Practices in The aim of this paper is to get a more profound, Technology Transfer, carried out within the scope of Activity comprehensive and up to date understanding of the state of 5, with both outputs to be used as a basis in the UBC in Slovakia: what is the state of play of a wide range of implementation of the other foreseen project activities. UBC activities, what are the main drivers and barriers for the This paper is structured within five main sections. Section 1 different stakeholders and at what levels; what is the sets out the introduction. Section 2 discusses methodology of regulatory framework and socio-economic conditions and the research. Section 3 provides an overview of the 2 best what kind of measures/initiatives exist on a national level to practices within Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice and , support the development of UBC. Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava. Section 4 This paper compiles the best practices identified by Slovak provides conclusions, stemming from the analysis of the case Centre of Scientific and Technical Information after studies. conducting desk and field research, carried out within the † Corresponding author Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal 2 Methodology or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of The process of collection of best practices included the this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). following 4 stages: Initial Desk Research, Internal Review © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). and Selection of preliminary identified best practices, Field Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia research, Involvement of Stakeholders. Data was gathered through two-step qualitative research with the use of 15 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Rudolf Pástor templates for both the review of secondary sources and the 3 Best practices from Slovakia field survey. This approach ensured the collection of identical 3.1 Transfer of rights carried out by information and significant level of trustworthy and reliable results. Similarly, the assessment of the collected data was Technology and Innovation Park of the Pavol held at two levels – internally by partners and externally by Jozef Šafárik University in Košice and its TTC stakeholders. This double check led to improvement of the produced materials and ensured that the expertise and The first best practice presented Academy-Industry contribution of the organisations involved in the assessment Collaboration between the Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in has been reflected in the final collection of best practices. The Košice (Technology and Innovation Park of the Pavol Jozef research focused on answering the following main questions: Šafárik University in Košice), Comenius University in - WHAT? (What is the best practice about? What Bratislava, Masaryk University in Brno and the Czech holding have been the main factors contributing for its suc- group FABA Capital. cess? What challenges have been faced and what ac- The cross-border cooperation between three universities tions have been taken to address them? To what ex- and one start-up has brought significant success in the field tent is the best practice applicable in another set- of technology transfer to the Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in ting? What has been the main impact of the best Košice at the end of 2022. The concluded intellectual practice?) property transfer agreement will bring a new technology - WHO? (Who is involved in the implementation of closer to practice. the best practice?) Successful technology transfer of the MicroRNA test of the - WHEN? (Since when the best practice has been in success of the IVF (in vitro fertilization) process and existence?) diagnostics of a quality embryo for IVF. Technology transfer - WHERE? (Where is the best practice located?) that can contribute to the success of assisted reproduction by - WHY? (Why is it important to study this best prac- the IVF method. Innovative technology consists in the non- - HOW? (How can certain aspects of the best practice to the embryo, by analyzing isolated miRNA molecules from be further improved?) [2]. the culture medium as new biomarkers. Molecules are thus tice?) invasive collection of biological material without any damage able to help in personalized medicine in predicting the 2.1 Initial desk research success of IVF through the selection of a suitable embryo. Duration of best practice is since 2019. The Technology Initial desk research involved the study of secondary Transfer Center at CVTI SR entered the process in the fall of 2019, when it delivered an evaluation report and research on sources, i.e. through searching information available on the the state of the art to the Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Internet or in relevant literature. The most relevant results Košice. The Slovak patent application was sub mitted to the were then carefully reviewed and additional information was Industrial Property Office in March 2020. In 2021 the patent collected about each best practice identified [2]. attorney filed an international PCT application (on the basis Within desk research in cooperation with The Technology of the Patent Cooperation Treaty). The sign of the contract on Transfer Center (CTT) at Slovak Centre of Scientific and the transfer of IP to the start-up FETUS, IVF occurred on Technical Information (CVTI SR), we have reviewed institu- December 20, 2022 between the four contracting parties. tions that had successfully implemented technology transfer The best practice is about successful technological transfer with good practice strategies in the sector. This was followed and close cooperation with the commercial and legal by another session to present examples of good practice that department at the Technology and Innovation Park of the best fit the STEIDA project priorities. Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice. Professionally provided commercialization process. The new technology, protected by a patent application, 2.2 Field research identifies new microRNA (miRNA) molecules that can be used in prediction. Simply put, the identified molecules Field research involved the collection of data from primary predict the women's current readiness and the quality of the sources, i.e. from the organizations responsible for the best embryo suitable for the artificial insemination process. practices. Each organization, which had been identified dur- The importance of the invention is underlined by its ing the initial desk research as responsible for a best practice, nomination for the Technology Transfer Award in Slovakia in was contacted by the CVTI SR as a project partner and re- 2021, in the Innovation category, and finally, the quested to complete the questionnaire for field research. The transformation of the nomination into the victory of the interviews with the organisations providing the best prac- MicroRNA test for the success of the IVF process and tices were conducted face-to-face diagnostics in its category. in Košice and Bratislava. The information obtained from the field research comple- As part of the commercialization of academic and university mented and expanded the data gathered during the desk re- projects, a new fabaincube incubator was created for other search [2]. similar projects. 16 University - Business Cooperation in Slovakia Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Three universities, one investor, services and coordination 3.2 Technology transfer implemented at from the CTT CVTI SR are behind the success in the field of the Slovak University of Technology in technology transfer. Bratislava CTT CVTI SR entered the process in the fall of 2019, when it delivered an evaluation report and state-of-the-art research to Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice. The next step in The second best practice presented Academy-Industry the process of successful technology transfer was the filing of collaboration between Faculty of Chemical and Food a patent application. Technology (FCHTP) of the Slovak University of Technology The concluded intellectual property transfer agreement will bring a new technology closer to in Bratislava (STU), Polymer Institute of the Slovak Academy practice. of Science and the commercial company PANARA. It concerns The research of two Slovak and one Czech university and the first Slovak bioplastic Nonoilen, which represents a 100% subsequent entry of the holding company FABA Capital bring ecological solution in the field of biodegradable plastics. into practice a new technology that can contribute to the Nonoilen was created by Slovak scientists as part of PANARA success of assisted reproduction by the IVF method. The task cooperation with the scientific team from the Faculty of of the start-up, which is part of the FABA Capital group, is Chemical and Food Technology of STU in Bratislava and is now the commercialization of the IVF embryo transfer protected by Slovak and international patent protection. The project. FABA invested 441 000 EUR in the startup. The material was not only created, but is also commercially used. investment includes the transfer of intellectual property The best practice is about the PANARA cooperation with the rights to the newly established startup Fetus with scientific scientific team from the Faculty of Chemical and Food teams from universities in Bratislava, Košice and Brno Technology of STU in Bratislava . The challenge is in combination of molecular methods with Nonoilen is the result of R&D collaboration between the use of artificial intelligence in biomedicine, to bring scientists from the Slovak Technical University in Bratislava better healthcare as well as a higher quality of life for (Faculty of Chemical and Food Technology) and private everyone, not just infertile couples. company PANARA. The goal of both parties is to produce The challenge was determining the value of this solution for bioplastics with a wide range of practical uses. the purposes of concluding the contract. An expert Contractually sealed long-term cooperation between FCHPT determined the general value of the invention. This was then and the commercial company PANARA is an example of "the used to determine the value of the final contract between the best practice". In the field of bioplastics, the faculty used its universities and the financial holding. scientific potential, in which it is supported technically and Certain aspects of the best practice can be improved by economically by PANARA, which, on the other hand, as a inviting other specialists to the research group with representative of the business sphere, knows how to create experience in the field of study and high-capacity analyzes of suitable conditions for applied development supported by miRNA molecules in clinical material. the faculty and the implementation of research into the It is important to study this best practice because it industrial production. ’ s a breakthrough in the field of intellectual property Thanks to mutual support, not only was it created, but it is commercialization. This is the first ever successful transfer of also used commercially. Nonoilen was tested and was put intellectual property within Slovak universities that we have into practice on a pilot basis in several Slovak and foreign information about, and CTT CVTI SR significantly contributed companies. to its implementation. The idea of entering the market with a material that would The professional technology transfer departments of all have the properties of Nonoilen was introduced to academia three universities involved played an irreplaceable role in by Pavol Alexy, a young engineer in the 1990s. Later, the the entire process. knowledge and experience of a by then professor Alexy were Based on a detailed assessment of the invention and its combined with the risk tolerance of PANARA, which potential for commercial use by experts from CTT CVTI SR, provided the university research with necessary conditions, was recommended offering a license to use the invention to and also actively took part in a significant portion of the reproductive centers. They also provided support to Slovak research. Their synergy and enthusiasm for finding the universities in obtaining patent protection with the aim of possibilities to create and especially bring to market a truly subsequently selling the invention in question." ecological bioplastic have united into the Nonoilen granulate This best practice is highly applicable in other academic and we have today. institutional settings, especially where there is a need to The main factors that have contributed for the success of the strengthen the cooperation between the research and best practice are: long-term cooperation between academic industry. sector (FCHPT) and commercial sector (PANARA). The The main impact of this best practice is in bringing into Slovak University of Technology is collaborating with the practice a new technology that can contribute to the success Brno University of Technology in Czechia. The scientists of assisted reproduction using the IVF method. there, together with a commercial company, have developed a technology specifically for processing waste oils into polyhydroxybutyrate. In the field of bioplastics FCHTP use its scientific potential, in which it is technically and economically supported by PANARA, which, on the other 17 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Rudolf Pástor hand, as a representative of the business sphere, is able to management of technology transfer processes (digital create suitable conditions for applied development services, innovative approaches, project support services), supported by the faculty and the implementation of research commercialization of patents, university-industry The authors of this invention gave a license to the Nitra- spin-offs. Each best practice begins with a brief description, information about the providing organisation, duration of its based company PANARA, which focuses on the development into industrial production. cooperation to promoting entrepreneurship and creation of and production of ecological plastics. main success factors, challenges faced, mitigation actions, existence, and continues with more insights related to the From the point of view of the application use of Nonoilen, the possible improvements, applicability and impact. The paper faculty (FCHTP) has definitively developed recipes for has been developed by the CVTI SR with the involvement of packaging films from the first generation, and the second the organisations responsible for providing the best generation is practically complete, where only is needed to practices and target the main stakeholders of the project, verify production under industrial conditions. which include higher education institutions, business The STU team is also working intensively with companies support organisations, current and newcoming professionals One way is through mass commercial use in cooperation with entrepreneurs and companies. The paper will serve as one of the foreseen project outputs for dissemination of the STEIDA manufacturers of plastic containers, cutlery, packaging films, and universities to find ways to use the invention in practice. in technology transfer offices, students, academics, project results. or mulch films, which are used in agriculture to maintain moisture and prevent weed growth. The second path is original applications in the field of design and fashion. Here, chemists collaborate with designers from the crafting plastics studio. The third way for use is medical applications. Acknowledgments Here, the STU team is collaborating with the Faculty of This paper was supported by project STEIDA (Strengthening Medicine of Comenius University in Bratislava and top Technology Transfer Ecosystem through Innovative and implant development experts from the Technical University Digital Approaches), program Erasmus+, project ref. № of Košice. Bioplastics can be used as temporary implants for 2023-1-TR01-KA220-HED-000157242. treating complicated fractures. On the open market, 100% bioplastic cannot compete with the production price of super-cheap plastic made from petroleum today. References Certain aspects of the best practice can be improved by [1] Marina Ranga, Cecile Hoareau, Niccolo Durazzi, Henry Etzkowitz, enforcing the preference for the production of 100% Pamela Marcucci and Alex Usher, 2013. Study on University-Business bioplastics over classic plastics made from oil through clear Cooperation in the US. LSE Enterprise, London. Final Report [2] BCCI, 2025. Best Practices in Technology Transfer Report, January legislative rules. 2025. STEIDA. URL: http://www.steidaproject.net It is important to study this best practice because it is [3] Slovak University of Technology, 2024. Knoewledge Transfer Office STU. Survey - Research on Best Practices in Technology Transfer, important to work systematically on the most ecological WP2:A5, 13.9.2024 solutions in the field of polymers and thus improve the [4] Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice, 2024. CTT UPJŠ. Survey - Research on Best Practices in Technology Transfer, WP2:A5, ecological situation and the environment. 26.9.2024 This best practice is highly applicable in other academic and [5] Victoria Galan-Muros, Balzhan Orazbayeva, Peter Obdrzalek, D. private sector settings, especially where there is a need to Moravcikova, 2018. The State of Slovakian University-Business Cooperation Report (Business Perspective). DOI: strengthen the cooperation between research and industry. h10.13140/RG.2.2.34939.77608 It creates opportunities for introduction of new progressive [6] EC, 2024. Assessment of the Instruments, Deliverables, Results and materials that are environmentally more sustainable. Impact of University Business Cooperation. DOI:10.2766/514543 [7] Renáta Bačárová, Jana Daňková, Lenka Levarská, Martin Karlík, The main impact of the best practice is that research Jaroslav Noskovič, 2023. Úspešná technológia umelého oplodnenia v activities, predominantly carried out by the team of FCHTP, znamení príkladnej cezhraničnej spolupráce. DOI: 10.52036/TTb2023124 were completed by submitting an application for an [8] Univerzita Pavla Jozefa Šafárika, 2023. UPJŠ v Košiciach umožnila invention, which was awarded at the prestigious úspešnejšie riešenie neplodnosti vďaka patentu k novej technológii. URL: https://www.upjs.sk/aktuality/univerzita-pavla-jozefa- international fair of inventions and technologies. safarika-v-kosiciach-umoznila-uspesnejsie-riesenie-neplodnosti- vdaka-patentu-k-novej-technologii/ [9] Veda na dosah, 2019. Profesor Pavol Alexy: Bioplasty zo Slovenska obdivuje aj svet. URL: https://vedanadosah.cvtisr.sk/priroda/chemia/profesor- pavol-alexy-bioplasty-zo-slovenska-obdivuje-aj-svet/ 4 [10] Drtilivá, I., 2019. NONOILEN – Unikátny ekologický bioúplast. URL: Conclusions https://www.fchpt.stuba.sk/sk/diani-na-fchpt/aktuality/nonoilen- unikatny-ekologicky-bioplast.html?fbclid=IwAR0lHD-cO-gZka- 15SsyG0vCP4pqcJN_yXlJho1U0gmJXhopAa1iUbyMzEc&page_id=434 The paper provides information about best practices in the 0 field of technology transfer, identified in the STEIDA project by the Slovak Centre of Scientific and Technical Information. The best practices have been collected and elaborated through desk and field research and encompass different sub-categories of technology transfer ranging from 18 Developing University Industry Collaboration through Liaison Offices in Organized Industrial Zones: The KTU TTC Example Beril DEĞERMENCİ* Dilek İSKENDER BALABAN Yalçın AYKUT Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Trabzon, TÜRKİYE Trabzon, TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE berildegermenci@ktu.edu.tr dilekiskender@ktu.edu.tr yalcin.aykut@ktu.edu.tr Emrah AYVAZ Sedanur KALYONCU İslam YILDIZ Technology Transfer ARC Karadeniz Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Technical University Trabzon / Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE emrahayvaz@ktu.edu.tr sedanursaglam@ktu.edu.tr islamyildiz@ktu.edu.tr Kerim SÖNMEZ Eren YILMAZ Güler Tuğba GÜLTEKİN Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE kerimsonmez@ktu.edu.tr erenyilmaz@ktu.edu.tr gulertugbagultekin@ktu.edu.tr Gözde SAĞLAM Technology Transfer ARC Müslüm Serhat ÜNVER Hülya SABIR Karadeniz Technical University Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University gozdesaglam@ktu.edu.tr Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE serhatunver@ktu.edu.tr hulyahacisalihoglu@ktu.edu.tr Samet Can DEĞİRMENCİ Technology Transfer ARC Aleyna AYDIN Ayhan KOÇ Karadeniz Technical University Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University sdegirmenci@ktu.edu.tr Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE aleynaaydin@ktu.edu.tr ayhankoc@ktu.edu.tr Abstract matchmaking records, complemented by qualitative feedback from stakeholders. This study investigates how establishing Technology Transfer Office (TTO) liaison offices within Organized Industrial Zones Findings demonstrate that the OIZ-based liaison model (OIZs) can overcome structural and communicational barriers in substantially increased firm engagement (from 15 firms in 2019 university–industry cooperation. The research adopts a to 76 in 2024), facilitated 43 academic–industry pairings leading qualitative case study methodology, drawing on longitudinal data to 20 publicly funded projects, and supported the establishment (2018–2024) from the Karadeniz Technical University of two certified R&D Centers and one accredited test center. Technology Transfer Application and Research Center (KTU Moreover, the initiative enhanced firms’ awareness of R&D TTC). Data sources include institutional records, project incentives and fostered a shift from intermediary-based databases, company visit logs, and academic–industry interactions to direct cooperation, indicating the formation of a sustainable trust-based collaboration culture. The added value of *Beril DEĞERMENCİ is corresponding author of the ARC for Technology Transfer this study lies in providing empirical evidence on a place-based Karadeniz Technical University in Trabzon, Türkiye. interface model for technology transfer, an area largely Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). 19 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia B. Değermenci et al. overlooked in prior literature. While most research focuses on impact of the model on cooperation frequency, project university- or technopark-embedded TTOs, this paper shows that generation, and R&D capacity building. In doing so, it relocating interface structures directly into industrial zones contributes to filling a gap in the literature by providing empirical accelerates collaboration, enhances accessibility, and strengthens evidence on the effectiveness of field-embedded TTOs as a regional innovation ecosystems. The findings contribute a scalable strategy for fostering regional innovation ecosystems. transferable model for policymakers and practitioners seeking to bridge structural gaps between academia and industry and to 1.1. Theoretical Background design more inclusive innovation policies. The theoretical foundation of this study builds on the literature concerning university–industry collaboration (UIC) and the role of intermediary structures in fostering innovation. Prior research Keywords has highlighted Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) as crucial Technology transfer office, organized industrial zones, mechanisms for bridging academic knowledge and industrial university industry collaboration application, yet their effectiveness is often shaped by spatial proximity, institutional capacity, and relational trust (Perkmann 1. Introduction et al., 2013; Bozeman et al., 2015). While traditional models University industry cooperation (UIC) has long been recognized emphasize campus-based or technopark-based structures, as a cornerstone for fostering innovation, driving regional emerging perspectives in innovation policy underline the economic growth, and enhancing national competitiveness [1]. importance of place-based interface models that embed transfer Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) play a pivotal role in this mechanisms directly within industrial clusters. This conceptual process by acting as intermediary structures that facilitate the lens frames the present study, situating Organized Industrial commercialization of research outputs, support intellectual Zones (OIZs) not only as production sites but also as potential property management, and promote collaborative R&D activities innovation hubs where localized interaction can reduce barriers, between academia and industry. However, despite the strategic accelerate technology transfer, and cultivate trust-based importance of TTOs, structural and spatial barriers often limit ecosystems. their effectiveness, particularly in regions where industrial actors are physically distant from universities or technoparks. 2. Methodology This study adopts a qualitative case study approach to examine In many cases, industrial firms especially those located in the outcomes and impact of establishing Technology Transfer TTO services due to geographical separation, limited awareness Office (TTO) liaison offices within Organized Industrial Zones Organized Industrial Zones (OIZs) face challenges in accessing of university capabilities, and the absence of sustained (OIZs), focusing on the model implemented by Karadeniz communication channels. Conversely, universities and TTOs Technical University Technology Transfer Application and evolving technological needs of the industry. This gap reduces is considered appropriate for in-depth analysis of real-life interventions where the boundaries between phenomenon and the potential for joint innovation, delays the transfer of encounter difficulties in understanding and responding to the Research Center (KTU TTC) in Türkiye. The case study method knowledge, and hinders the establishment of a collaborative context are not clearly defined [3]. culture. The literature on technology transfer has largely focused on models situated within university campuses or science parks, 2.1. Data Collection with relatively little empirical research examining place-based Primary data were collected through institutional records, project interface structures embedded directly within industrial zones[2]. databases, and semi-structured observations maintained by KTU TTC between 2018 and 2024. These records included: To address this challenge, Karadeniz Technical University  Annual reports and internal monitoring documents, Technology Transfer Application and Research Center (KTU  Company visit logs and academic-industry TTC) implemented an innovative interface model by establishing matchmaking records, liaison offices within OIZs in Trabzon of Türkiye. Launched in  Publicly funded project data (e.g., TÜBİTAK, 2018, this initiative aimed to strengthen university industry ties KOSGEB, DOKA), by physically embedding TTO representatives in industrial  R&D Center application files and outcomes, clusters, thus enabling direct, regular, and trust-based  Training and awareness session participation data. interactions with companies. These offices served as access points for firms to receive tailored guidance on R&D incentives, Additionally, informal interviews and feedback were gathered engage in academic matchmaking, and initiate collaborative from TTO staff members and OIZ representatives involved in the projects, while also allowing TTO staff to observe industrial implementation and follow-up processes. These provided needs on-site and respond more rapidly. contextual insights into challenges, adaptations, and perceptions The central research question guiding this study is: How can the of stakeholders regarding the liaison office model. physical presence of TTO liaison offices within OIZs enhance collaboration, technology transfer, and innovation outcomes in 2.2. Evaluation Framework regional ecosystems? By examining six years of operational data The collected data were analyzed using a descriptive and impact- from KTU TTC’s OIZ liaison offices, this paper evaluates the focused framework. Key performance indicators (KPIs) were 20 Developing University Industry Collaboration through Liaison Offices in Organized Industrial Zones: The KTU TTC Example Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia identified to assess the effectiveness of the liaison offices, Technology Transfer Application and Research Center (KTU including: TTC) has yielded significant outcomes in fostering university industry collaboration. The analysis of institutional records from  Number of companies reached per year, 2018 to 2024 reveals substantial improvements in key indicators  Number of academic–industry pairings facilitated, related to R&D engagement, academic industry matchmaking,  and innovation driven project development. Number of publicly funded projects initiated,   Increased Industry Engagement Number of R&D Centers established,  The number of companies contacted annually through liaison Level of firm engagement with R&D incentives before and after implementation, offices increased markedly from 15 in 2019 to 76 in 2024. This  upward trend demonstrates the growing awareness of and trust in Qualitative feedback on trust, accessibility, and cooperation dynamics. TTO services among industrial actors. Initial skepticism The evolution of these indicators over time allowed for a regarding collaboration with universities was gradually longitudinal analysis of the model’s effectiveness in overcome through face-to-face interactions and trust-building strengthening university industry collaboration and fostering an visits. This aligns with previous literature emphasizing the innovation-driven culture in the region. Comparative data from importance of proximity and sustained contact in university pre-implementation years (before 2018) were also used as a industry partnerships [4]. baseline to assess progress.  Enhanced Academic Industry Matchmaking One of the most critical outcomes has been the increase in 2.3. Limitations academic industry pairings. A total of 43 academic matchings As a single-case study, this research does not seek to generalize were facilitated through liaison offices, leading to 20 publicly findings statistically but to provide transferable insights that may funded R&D projects. These projects received support from inform similar practices in other institutional or regional national programs such as TÜBİTAK, KOSGEB, and DOKA. contexts. While the qualitative nature of the study captures the The pairing process, based on companies' identified R&D needs depth of implementation processes and outcomes, further and academic expertise areas, has proven effective in translating research incorporating surveys or interviews with company industrial problems into collaborative solutions a key function of representatives could enrich the analysis with more user-centered successful technology transfer [5]. perspectives.  Institutional Outcomes and R&D Capacity The model directly contributed to the establishment of two 2.4. Data Analysis Procedure formal R&D Centers Çolakoğlu Makina (2018) and TİSAŞ The qualitative data analysis was conducted in a sequential (2019) which gained official recognition from the Ministry of process designed to capture both descriptive patterns and impact- Industry and Technology. Moreover, Mekap Deri ve Ayakkabı oriented outcomes. First, all institutional records, project opened an accredited Test Center within Trabzon Technopark in databases, visit logs, and matchmaking reports were compiled 2020, expanding the innovation infrastructure of the region. and organized chronologically. Second, the data were These institutional outcomes are indicators of long-term capacity systematically coded to identify recurring themes related to firm building and a shift from one-off collaborations to structured engagement, academic collaboration, and R&D capacity R&D engagement. building. Third, a descriptive analysis was performed to  Shift in Interaction Dynamics summarize observable trends across the six-year period, Over time, the communication pattern between industry and highlighting changes in the number of firms reached, TTO transformed significantly. While the initial contact relied partnerships established, and projects generated. Fourth, an heavily on intermediary based liaison office visits, many firms impact-focused analysis was carried out using the previously began to approach KTU TTC directly. This behavioral change defined KPIs (e.g., number of R&D Centers established, uptake indicates increased confidence, reduced informational of incentive programs, and shifts in communication dynamics) to asymmetry, and institutionalization of trust a cornerstone of evaluate the broader significance of the liaison office model. sustainable university industry relations [6]. Finally, the results of both analyses were triangulated with  Broader Impacts on Regional Innovation Ecosystem qualitative feedback from TTO staff and OIZ representatives to The liaison offices served not only as connectors but also as ensure contextual validity and to capture nuanced stakeholder disseminators of knowledge. Awareness-raising activities and perspectives. This step-by-step approach ensured that the on-site visits led to a more widespread understanding of R&D findings reflect not only quantitative improvements but also incentives and innovation processes. The number of firms qualitative transformations in trust, accessibility, and benefiting from TÜBİTAK’s industrial R&D supports increased cooperation culture. from only 2 before 2018 to 6 by 2024. These results indicate a more innovation literate and incentive-oriented industrial base in 3. Findings and Discussion the region. The establishment of TTO liaison offices within Organized Industrial Zones (OIZs) by Karadeniz Technical University 21 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia B. Değermenci et al. 3.1. Contribution to Literature models into smart specialization and cluster development strategies to ensure that knowledge flows and innovation This case contributes to the literature by operationalizing a place- incentives reach local firms effectively. based interface model for technology transfer an under- In conclusion, the liaison office model implemented by KTU researched area in TTO studies. Most existing models situate TTC represents a replicable and scalable good practice for TTOs within universities or technoparks; however, this study strengthening innovation ecosystems in industrial regions. It not shows that embedding liaison offices directly within industrial only increases the operational reach of TTOs but also contributes clusters yields faster, more targeted, and trust-enhanced to a more balanced, inclusive, and responsive innovation interactions. These findings are consistent with evolving infrastructure at the regional level. perspectives in innovation policy that emphasize spatial proximity, context-sensitivity, and relational trust [7]. The model 4.2. Transferability and Future Research appears transferable to other regions with similar structural gaps The OIZ-based TTO liaison office model presented in this study between academia and industry, provided that administrative is not limited to the specific context of the Black Sea region but support, qualified human resources, and sector-sensitive can also be applied to comparable environments with similar approaches are in place. structural conditions. In particular, regions where university– industry interaction is weak, access to technoparks is limited, or 4. Conclusion and Policy Implications firms have low awareness of R&D incentives present high This study examined the impact of establishing Technology potential for transferability. However, the successful Transfer Office (TTO) liaison offices within Organized implementation of the model requires the establishment of Industrial Zones (OIZs) as a strategy to strengthen university supportive administrative mechanisms, the provision of qualified industry collaboration and stimulate regional innovation. human resources, and the development of strategies sensitive to Drawing on the case of Karadeniz Technical University regional sectoral dynamics. Technology Transfer Application and Research Center (KTU For future research, comparative case studies across different TTC), the findings clearly demonstrate that embedding TTO test the scalability of the model. Moreover, surveys and in-depth universities and industrial zones would provide opportunities to services within industrial zones significantly improves access, interviews with firm representatives could offer richer insights communication, and trust between academic institutions and into the effects of the model from the industry perspective. Multi- industrial firms. case analyses and international comparisons would further validate the applicability of this approach in diverse contexts, Over a six-year period, the liaison offices contributed to thereby contributing more comprehensively to the literature on measurable outcomes, including a substantial increase in firm university–industry collaboration. engagement, academic industry partnerships, publicly funded R&D projects, and institutional advancements such as the REFERENCES establishment of R&D Centers. Furthermore, the model [1] Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., facilitated a behavioral transformation to direct collaboration D’este, P., ... & Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic engagement and signifying a positive cultural shift in how firms approach commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry innovation and research partnerships. relations. Research policy, 42(2), 423-442. [2] Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., & Youtie, J. (2015). The evolving state-of- the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent By physically positioning TTO representatives in proximity to effectiveness model. Research Policy, 44(1), 34-49. industrial actors, this place-based model overcame spatial and [3] Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications (Vol. 6). perceptual barriers that often limit effective technology transfer. In Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doing so, it addressed a key gap in the literature, which has [4] Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2004). Searching high and low: what types largely overlooked the potential of interface structures located of firms use universities as a source of innovation?. Research policy, 33(8), 1201-1215. outside of universities or technoparks. This research offers [5] Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact empirical evidence that such structures can catalyze not only of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university transactional outcomes (e.g., projects, incentives, certifications) technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research policy, 32(1), but also relational outcomes (e.g., trust, communication habits, 27-48. innovation culture). [6] Bruneel, J., d’Este, P., & Salter, A. (2010). Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration. Research policy, 39(7), 858-868. 4.1 Policy Implications [7] Fitjar, R. D., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2011). Innovating in the The results of this study offer several important implications for periphery: Firms, values and innovation in Southwest Norway. European policymakers, regional planners, and university administrators: Planning Studies, 19(4), 555-574. Support for Field-Based TTO Models: National and regional innovation policies should support the expansion of liaison office models in industrial zones, particularly in regions with weak university industry ties or limited technopark access. Institutional Incentives and Funding: Dedicated funding mechanisms can be developed to support the operational costs of liaison offices, including staffing, mobility, and digital tools for academic industry matchmaking. Integration into Smart Specialization Strategies: Regional development agencies should integrate liaison-based TTO 22 Knowledge Sharing, Protection of Trade Secrets, and Sensitive Practices in the Circular Economy Magda Lužar† Faculty of Information Studies in Novo mesto, Slovenia magda.luzar@fis.unm.si Abstract competitive advantage for their business. Trade secrets are information with economic value that is not publicly available The paper addresses the research problem of how companies in and is subject to protective measures as defined by the EU the circular economy reconcile open knowledge sharing with the Directive [7]. Often in practice, companies consider as trade protection of trade secrets and other sensitive practices. A secrets even their own knowledge that is not formally protected secondary analysis was conducted on the basis of relevant by legal means. Nevertheless, knowledge is strategically articles from the WoS and Scopus databases, which were important and therefore they do not want to disclose it to external published internationally in the last decade. Knowledge sharing partners. In this paper, we therefore provide a perspective on the environment at the content, organizational, technological, formally protected information and informal forms of protecting cultural and strategic levels are identified. The findings show that sensitive content that companies (do not) want to disclose to and protection approaches that appear in the business sharing and protection of knowledge and the inclusion of companies use combinations of selective, phased, organizational partners. In this paper, we follow the research question of how and digitally enabled knowledge sharing. The mentioned sharing companies in the circular economy reconcile open exchange and is often coordinated with protection approaches: through sharing of knowledge with the protection of trade secrets and restricted access, trust and technological security measures. other sensitive practices. Added value leads to an understanding of how to establish a balance between collaboration and protection of knowledge in the transition to a circular economy, which is often overlooked 2 Theoretical Background in companies, primarily due to market existence and achieving An economic system that aims to eliminate waste and of competitive advantage. continuously use resources through reuse, recovery and recycling Keywords can be understood as a circular economy [11]. There are numerous definitions of the circular economy in literature. The Sharing knowledge, trade secrets, sensitive practices, knowledge transition of companies to a circular economy creates a need for protection, circular economy collaboration within and outside the industry. The challenge for organizations is to overcome organizational, technological, 1 financial and regulatory barriers [12]. Companies are under Introduction pressure to maintain a competitive advantage, and this poses the Companies today operate in a competitive global environment, challenge of how to share knowledge without compromising facing ever-increasing customer demands and at the same time sensitive information and trade secrets. Interorganizational pursuing rapidly evolving technological progress. To overcome relationships and exploiting different aspects of collaboration in these challenges, innovative and strategic actions need to be line with company goals and with partners and geographical oriented towards sustainability. Knowledge sharing refers to the proximity are crucial for maintaining competitive advantage [6, intentional exchange of information, experiences, ideas and 15]. skills among stakeholders, which contributes to knowledge A successful transition to a circular economy requires an application, innovation and optimization of the organization [22]. understanding of knowledge, which is a key source of Companies are increasingly dependent on knowledge sharing in competitiveness. It can be documented or possessed by all aspects of their business if they want to operate in a circular, individuals in experience and in competence [16]. Its sharing innovative and sustainable manner. The growing need for involves a process for innovation and learning [22]. Often, the collaboration accompanies them and presents them with the knowledge to be shared is limited and protected. A trade secret challenge of how to share knowledge without jeopardizing their is information that (1) is secret in the sense that it is not generally own trade secrets or other sensitive practices that are a known or readily accessible, (2) has commercial value because it †Corresponding author. is secret, and (3) has been subject to reasonable steps to keep it Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or confidential [7]. In addition to legally protected secrets, classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed organizations manage sensitive practices. Their disclosure could for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full threaten competitiveness and therefore they use formal or citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). informal protection approaches [6, 21]. Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Knowledge sharing is crucial for successful collaboration in © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). circular models. Selective sharing [14, 21], modular sharing [3] and phased sharing [10, 13] are practices that allow companies 23 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia M. Lužar. to decide what knowledge to share and when. Often, knowledge 99 records were identified in Scopus and 59 records in WoS. is shared in an abstract or generalized form [21] to avoid After removing 46 duplicates, 112 documents remained, which revealing technical details. Organizational filtering or sharing is were reviewed based on title and abstract. After the first reading, implemented within the company through organizational roles 95 were eliminated as irrelevant documents. 17 articles were depending on the context of collaboration [13]. submitted for assessment of relevance and included in the final Contemporary digital platforms and technologies (open data analysis. (Figure 1). channels, digital twins, IoT, AR glasses and other smart devices) [10, 12] enable structured, personalized and controlled knowledge sharing. Platforms (e.g. Circular Living Lab) are a space for knowledge and information sharing between companies, consultants and research institutions [2, 19]. The collaborative system is strengthened through the aforementioned platforms, which enable two-way learning and structured and transparent communication between stakeholders [2, 20]. Due to the sharing of knowledge, information, content, sensitive practices and trade secrets, companies develop protective approaches or strategies. Selective disclosure, where only part of the knowledge is shared, is based on mapping and classifying competencies, sensitive information and roles in the collaboration [2, 3, 10]. Informal protective practices are used, when stakeholders share information only with a sufficiently high level of trust and predictable behavior. In the form of informal conversations or psychological contracts and relational trust, they regulate information sharing if stable partnership relationships are present [6, 21]. Organizations reduce risk through controlled partner selection, often using intermediaries who act as filters that determine what knowledge enters the network and what remains protected. [19]. Access to knowledge is regulated by technological solutions for filtering and control Figure 1: PRISMA 2020 flow diagram of the study selection through roles and competencies. [12] process Coordinated strategies have been reported when companies combine sharing and protection, through digital sharing controls, [3, 4] through gradual knowledge disclosure [13, 20] and when 4 Results and Discussion sharing is tailored to the user according to their competency The review of the contributions allowed for the definition and profile [10]. interpretation of perspectives that enable companies in the Most research addresses knowledge sharing and knowledge circular economy to share knowledge in a coordinated manner protection separately. In a circular economy, collaboration and while protecting sensitive practices, information and trade competitiveness are intertwined and comprehensive approaches secrets. Approaches occur at the content, organizational, that include both aspects need to be explored. This paper then technological, cultural and strategic levels. Opportunities were addresses this gap by identifying approaches used to implement identified that reflect the coordinated use of approaches. a circular economy. At the content level, companies implement selective and modular knowledge sharing. They selectively filter knowledge 3 content within “safe” topics and share only non-sensitive Methods information. Sensitive information, such as detailed processes, is To prepare the paper, a systematic literature review was protected [2, 14, 21]. Organizations implement knowledge and conducted in June and July 2025, in accordance with the competence mapping to coordinate collaborations [3]. If goals PRISMA guidelines [17]. The aim was to identify knowledge are aligned, companies share information about production sharing and exchanges and the protection of sensitive content and processes between partners, but under conditions of relational trade secrets within the circular economy. The analysis included trust [6]. Phased knowledge selection means more protection in scientific articles, regardless of the research methodology used development, more openness in implementation, sharing is in (e.g. qualitative, quantitative, mixed), as the inclusion criterion steps [10, 13, 20]. Modular content distribution allows controlled focused on the relevance of the findings to the research question. access only to individual content sets. Knowledge is pre- The literature was selected from the extensive WoS and Scopus classified and only what is safe or necessary for the process is databases, and selective filtering was used on keywords. A single shared. Partial internalization is present, when appropriate search string was used for the WoS and Scopus databases: external knowledge is accepted from a security perspective and “exchange of knowledge”, “knowledge sharing”, “trade secrets”, internal resources are protected. External competencies are “confidential information”, “circular economy”, “circular converted into potential internal resources [3]. business models”. The circular economy is present in all aspects At the organizational level, knowledge is shared through of business, so we did not exclude any area. We limited ourselves organizational roles (project manager, manager, consulting to papers that were published internationally in the last ten years. organizations), which filter the content and level of shared 24 Knowledge Sharing, Protection of Trade Secrets, and Sensitive Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Practices in the Circular Economy knowledge and prevent uncontrolled disclosure of knowledge by revealed during sharing [3, 6, 10, 14, 21]. Partners are provided experts. They determine which knowledge enters the network with enough data to be able to collaborate effectively. The and which remains protected [2, 13, 19]. In addition, partners are alignment between capabilities and needs is important, so carefully selected based on the level of trust and previous companies create an overview of existing knowledge and skills experience, which enables effective collaborative relationships and identify what, how much and how to include in the [6, 14]. At the same time, research and design teams are collaboration. established to promote knowledge sharing [8]. At the organizational level, knowledge sharing is controlled by At the technological level, digital technologies provide central intermediaries who take on certain roles between experts and support, which are the central tools for secure, personalized and external partners. At the same time, companies carefully select continuous knowledge exchange [3, 4, 10, 18]. They use partners based on trust and previous experience [6, 13, 19]. This technological tools (open data channels, visualization support approach reduces the risk of uncontrolled disclosure of key with smart devices, decision-support technologies) that enable information with partners. Intermediaries act as a filter to control the transfer of complex knowledge through graphic or data the dynamics and content of the exchange. Careful selection of displays. Technological solutions enable traceability and access partners further reduces the risk, but also narrows the network of restrictions [1, 12]. Communication is adapted to the user profile potential collaborations and wider openness. through digital interfaces. [10] Researchers, consultants and Secure, structured and flexible sharing and exchange of companies develop and test solutions and collaborate in knowledge is enabled by digital platforms and technologies. innovation laboratories (Circular Living Lab) [19]. Blockchain, IoT, digital identity, AR technologies are advanced Organizations collaborate in circular ecosystems with industry, solutions that provide traceability and access control and increase researchers and governments to find solutions and share the transparency of processes [3, 4, 10, 12]. The findings show knowledge [5, 11, 20]. that digital technologies are becoming an important element in At the cultural level, the aspect of trust proves to be an essential addressing the challenges of sharing and protecting key content. component of successful knowledge sharing and protection. Complex information and knowledge can be reliably and Mentoring and informal conversations enable the exchange of securely transferred through controlled mechanisms. employee experiences and knowledge transfer [4]. Informal Long-term successful cooperation is also based on softer, human conversations are based on mutual expectations and trust of the factors. A culture of trust stands out, which strengthens work in process stakeholders and predictable behavior [21]. Partners the process with experience, mentoring and psychological share information only when there is a sufficiently high level of contracts between stakeholders. It is precisely a high level of trust trust, which indicates controlled disclosure of information [6]. In that enables the secure exchange of sensitive information and proactive collaboration, business ethics and transparency are of long-term cooperation, which are key to the functioning of the great importance in addition to trust [9]. circular economy. Mutual trust creates the foundations on which At the strategic level, sharing and protection are aligned with a company can more easily build long-term practices. the long-term goals of the company [4, 6, 20]. External The approaches are aligned with the broader strategic goals of stakeholders are involved gradually, depending on the nature and the companies, gradually involving stakeholders in the project phase of the project. Depending on the level of involvement, the phases. In doing so, they take into account the levels of level of protection of disclosed information and sensitive information protection or sensitivity of the collaboration [4, 12, practices changes [12, 19, 20]. Knowledge sharing serves as a 19, 20]. mediator in the relationship between intermediaries and Companies develop the ability to internalize external organizations. [23] competencies and personalized knowledge transfer based on user The findings of the reviewed literature indicate that in the competencies. Effective and targeted learning of employees and circular economy, companies use different approaches to balance stakeholders in the process and support in the introduction of open knowledge sharing and protection of sensitive practices and plate practices [3, 4, 8, 10]. trade secrets. The identified approaches are: content selectivity, Within the framework of the collaborative approach in networks organizational mechanisms, digital technologies, culture of trust, and incubators, companies, researchers and other stakeholders strategic orientation, personalization and collaboration in jointly develop innovations and solutions. In the organizational networks. The listed approaches occur at the content, and socio-technological framework for collaboration (Circular organizational, technological, cultural and strategic levels. Living Labs), companies, consultants and users can come Companies often combine knowledge sharing and protection together to collaborate and develop solutions [5, 12, 19]. approaches, rarely using only one strategy. This confirms that The combination of approaches allows organizations to openness to sharing and protection are processes through which simultaneously seize the opportunity of open innovation and collaboration is possible without jeopardizing key resources for reduce the risk of losing competitive advantage. This is important competitive business. Balance is achieved through targeted for governance in the circular economy and for cooperation control and shared content. between stakeholders in the process involved in sharing, using A selective and modular view of knowledge sharing is essential, and protecting knowledge, sensitive practices and trade secrets. where companies filter content according to its sensitivity (more or less important information) and the phase of the project. Only non-sensitive or secure content (non-confidential information) is 5 Conclussion shared, while measuring (mapping) competencies to align The paper identifies and formulates key approaches that collaboration. In this approach, competitive advantages are not companies in the circular economy use to balance open 25 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia M. Lužar. knowledge sharing with the protection of sensitive practices and [6] Colombo, B., Boffelli, A., Madonna, A., Gaiardelli, P., & Kalchschmidt, trade secrets. The findings show that selective, phased, M. (2025). The Fabric of Circular Economy: how can supply chain collaboration foster circular economy in the textile industry?. Supply organizationally and digitally supported combinations are used Chain Management: An International Journal, 30(7), 60-76. DOI: for knowledge sharing. These are often aligned with access https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-07-2024-0448 [7] Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council restriction strategies, relational trust and technological of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business safeguards. Coordination is considered in companies with regard information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and to technological infrastructure, strategic goals, level of trust and disclosure. European Union. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2016/943/oj [8] Dokter, G., Thuvander, L., & Rahe, U. (2021). How circular is current context of collaboration. Creating a balance is a response to risks design practice? Investigating perspectives across industrial design and and at the same time part of the process in an open innovation architecture in the transition towards a circular economy. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26, 692-708. DOI: environment. Sharing, simultaneous openness and protection are https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.12.032 necessary and necessary for long-term competitive advantage in [9] Dziubaniuk, O., & Aarikka-Stenroos, L. (2025). Ethical value co-creation the circular economy. This research opens new research in circular economy ecosystems: a case study of the textile industry. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. DOI: questions, namely, it should be examined which strategies or https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2024-0288 approaches are more effective depending on the industry or the [10] Fabio, G., Giuditta, C., Margherita, P., & Raffaeli, R. (2025). A human- centric methodology for the co-evolution of operators’ skills, digital tools size of the company. The nature of knowledge, sensitivity of and user interfaces to support the Operator 4.0. Robotics and Computer- information and the possibilities of its protection vary depending Integrated Manufacturing, 91, 102854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2024.102854 on the industry and the size of the company. Knowing these [11] Hadi, N. U. (2024). Unveiling the Complex Relationship between Open differences allows them to design appropriately tailored Circular Innovation and Business Circularity: The Role of Circular-Based approaches in the process that encourage collaboration while Dynamic Capabilities and Circular Ambidexterity. Sustainability, 16(17), 7647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177647 maintaining the security of key content. It would also be [12] Hadi, N. U., Almessabi, B., & Khan, M. I. (2025). Leveraging industry 4.0 necessary to analyze how the institutional environment and circular open innovation for digital sustainability: The role of circular ambidexterity. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and influences the formation of a balance between openness and Complexity, 11(2), 100545. DOI: knowledge protection. An in-depth analysis of various https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2025.100545 combinations would provide a view of how different approaches [13] Le Roy, F., Fernandez, A. S., & Po‐Chang, L. (2025). Managing coopetitive innovation: sharing while protecting knowledge in separated to sharing and protecting knowledge change throughout the life project teams. R&D Management, 55(1), 203-221.. cycle of project collaboration. The levels of sharing and DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12694 [14] Lin, H., Wang, G., & Zong, Q. (2025). How knowledge sharing and protecting knowledge show that companies in the circular protection in strategic alliances affects technological innovation in high- economy use comprehensive approaches where the elements are tech manufacturing firms. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management . DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09237-4 . not exclusive, but rather complementary. The main challenge is [15] Lisi, S., Mignacca, B., Grimaldi, M., & Greco, M. (2024). Unpacking the to establish a balance between open access to knowledge and relationship between circular economy and inter-organisational security and protection. Companies solve the challenges at the collaboration: an exploratory study and an analytical framework. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. DOI: content (filtering), organizational (roles), technological 10.1109/TEM.2024.3437772 (platforms), cultural (trust) and strategic (alignment with goals) [16] Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2007). The knowledge-creating levels. A coordinated balance between sharing and protecting [17] company. Harvard business review, 85(7/8), 162. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. knowledge is a dynamic process that must constantly adapt to C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj , 372 . market changes, technological changes and changes in DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 relationships between partners in the circular economy. [18] Rizos, V., & Bryhn, J. (2022). Implementation of circular economy approaches in the electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) sector: References Barriers, enablers and policy insights. Journal of Cleaner Production, 338, 130617. DOI: [1] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130617 Ahmed, M. F., Mokhtar, M. B., Lim, C. K., Hooi, A. W. K., & Lee, K. E. [19] Sergianni, L., De Chiara, A., & Mauro, S. (2024). Open Innovation as Fuel (2021). Leadership roles for sustainable development: The case of a for the Circular Economy: an Analysis of the Italian Context. Journal of Malaysian green hotel. Sustainability , 13 (18), 10260. DOI: Innovation Management , 12 (1), 188-204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810260 https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_012.001_0009 [2] Berndt, R., Cobârzan, D., & Eggeling, E. (2024). A Platform Architecture [20] Terjanika, V., Laktuka, K., Vistarte, L., Pubule, J., & Blumberga, D. for Data-and AI-supported human-centred Zero Defect Manufacturing for (2025). Co-Creating Low-Carbon Futures: An Open Innovation Roadmap Sustainable Production. IFAC-PapersOnLine , 58 (19), 622-627. DOI: for Regional CO2. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2024.09.231 Complexity , 100596. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2025.100596 [3] Castillo-Ospina, D. A., Ormazabal, M., de Vasconcelos Gomes, L., & [21] Thalmann, S., Maier, R., Remus, U., & Manhart, M. (2025). Connect with Ometto, A. R. (2025). A dynamic capabilities framework for building care: informal knowledge protection practices to enhance knowledge circular ecosystems by focal firms. Sustainable Production and sharing in networks of organizations. VINE Journal of Information and Consumption , 54 , 130-148. Knowledge Management Systems , 55 (3), 730-DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.12.022 750.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-02-2022-0051 . [4] Chowdhury, S., Dey, P. K., Rodríguez-Espíndola, O., Parkes, G., Tuyet, [22] Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and N. T. A., Long, D. D., & Ha, T. P. (2022). Impact of organisational factors directions for future research. Human resource management on the circular economy practices and sustainable performance of small review , 20 (2), 115-131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.10.001 and medium-sized enterprises in Vietnam. Journal of Business [23] Zhang, J., Adu Sarfo, P., Adjorlolo, G., Appiah, A., Nyantakyi, G., Bonzo, Research , 147 , 362-378. DOI: J. K., & Alam, S. (2025). Leveraging knowledge sharing for circular https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.077 economy practices in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): a [5] Colmenero Fonseca, F., Cárcel-Carrasco, J., Preciado, A., Martínez-pathway to achieving SDGs in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Enterprise Corral, A., & Salas Montoya, A. (2023). Comparative Analysis of the Information Management. DOI: https://doi-org.nukweb.nuk.uni-European Regulatory Framework for C&D Waste Management. Advances lj.si/10.1108/JEIM-03-2025-0188 in Civil Engineering , 2023 (1), 6421442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/6421442 26 Self-evaluation of Research Organizations in the Field of Knowledge Transfer Tomaž Lutman Jure Vindišar Technology Transfer Office Technology Transfer Office Jožef Stefan Institute National Institute of Biology Ljubljana, Slovenia Ljubljana, Slovenia tomaz.lutman@ijs.si jure.vindisar@nib.si Abstract society, is crucial. The Recommendation calls on Member States to provide financial and political support that will enable better Knowledge transfer plays a central role in transforming research integration of research with industry and society. Only in this outcomes into social and economic value, addressing both way will knowledge transfer have the greatest possible impact on technological progress and societal challenges. The European sustainable development and economic growth [1]. Council Recommendation 2022/2415 calls for systematic The Council of the EU encourages joint efforts to develop and approaches to knowledge transfer, supported by clear metrics, adopt definitions, metrics and indicators covering the different examines self-evaluation in research organisations, highlighting performance in the EU. Monitoring and evaluation practices its potential to improve performance, align activities with long- should be aligned with the broader framework for monitoring the appropriate policies, and stakeholder collaboration. This work channels of valorisation, with the aim of improving its international comparison and prevalence of quantitative European Research Area. [1]. term vision, and identify both strengths and gaps. It includes indicators as well as stresses the importance of combining them Across the EU, systematic self-evaluation of knowledge with qualitative indicators such as case studies, narratives, and transfer in research organizations remains uneven and often relationship assessments. The SCOPE methodology is presented limited in scope. While many organizations collect quantitative as a practical, values-based framework for responsible research indicators, fewer engage in structured, organisation-wide self- evaluation. By integrating both quantitative and qualitative evaluation that also captures informal, collaborative, and societal indicators, organisations can achieve fairer, more transparent, dimensions of knowledge transfer. The European Commission sustainable growth. The paper explores the existing approaches frameworks and self-assessment tools, but uptake is still at an for self-evaluation in the field of knowledge transfer and gives early and variable stage [2]. and more effective evaluations that foster societal impact and has acknowledged these gaps and is developing common recommendations for those being responsible for self- evaluations at research organisations as well for policy makers, setting the frame for performing evaluations. 2 Methodology Keywords In the period between November 2024 and August 2025 we knowledge transfer, self-evaluation, indicators, SCOPE reviewed the relative literature. We were interested to know methodology which are relevant guidelines for self-evaluation in the field of KT as well as which are most relevant quantitative indicators and how to balance them with the qualitative assessment. We are 1 members of The Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment INTRODUCTION innovation into social and economic value, as it enables Administrators (EARMA), Association of European Science and Technology Transfer Professionals (ASTP) and other relevant technological progress and addresses societal challenges. In its Knowledge transfer (KT) is key to transforming research and (COARA), European Association of Research Managers and Recommendation 2022/2415, the EU Council stresses that organizations, relevant for self-evaluation of KT and have thus insight in most relevant literature. Internal documents of relevant knowledge transfer must be systematic and supported by working groups not cited here as well as our experience as appropriate measures. Its effective implementation requires good technology transfer officers have been used to elaborate our management of intellectual property, including protection and recommendations. transfer into practice. The cooperation of various stakeholders, from researchers and entrepreneurs to decision-makers and civil 3 Guidelines for self-evaluation of knowledge Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or transfer classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full 3.1 Monitoring and evaluating research citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must organizations is reasonable and necessary be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia The reasons behind implementation of evaluating research © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). organisations (RO) are not only accountability for public funding, improvement of research quality and international 27 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia T. Lutman et al. competitiveness but they focus on broader impact reflecting the evaluating scientific excellence can also be useful in the field of growing expectation that science should benefit society, not only evaluating knowledge transfer. The San Francisco Declaration the academic community. Thus, the evaluation of RO in the field on Research Evaluation (DORA) and Strategy Evaluation of knowledge transfer has several positive effects. One of them Protocol (SEP, Netherland) call for the elimination of the use of is to shed light on those research organisations that have a high impact factor as the main measure of research quality. Instead, it potential for economic impact. The Redstone Venture Capital encourages evaluation based on the content of the work and Fund recently carried out a study of 457 research organisations recognizes the diversity of research results and contributions. from 34 European countries. The study showed differences in the SEP in particular sets the organization’s strategy as a key stone effectiveness of research organisations in creating companies. of evaluation. The Leiden Manifesto offers ten principles for the Some organisations achieve the same economic impact with €2 responsible use of metrics, emphasizing that quantitative metrics million as others with €200 million. The study highlights the should complement, not replace, professional judgment. It importance of (self)evaluation in the field of knowledge transfer advocates for transparent, inclusive, and tailored evaluation [3]. approaches that take into account context and differences between disciplines. The COARA agreement on research 3.2 A research organization must establish a evaluation reform builds on similar foundations and brings vision together organizations committed to long-term changes in the Vision is crucial to the long-term success of an organization, evaluation of researchers, projects, and institutions. COARA set setting its direction, inspiring employees, and aligning decisions up WG Responsible Metrics and Indicators, to deliver critical goals—it must be meaningful, inspiring, and easily understood. initiatives and instruments warn of the dangers of over-reliance on simple metrics and advocate for a holistic, fair, and quality- When effectively crafted, it acts as a compass that guides the with its overarching goals. A good vision goes beyond ambitious evaluation of the indicators used for evaluation. All those organization through change and challenges. In addition to oriented evaluation of research work in support of scientific providing internal direction, a good vision also communicates excellence and societal relevance [6], [7], [8] externally the organization’s values and commitment to a larger purpose, which can build trust with customers, partners, and 4 SCOPE Methodology communities. Without a clear vision, organizations can get lost in the operational details and lose a sense of long-term The SCOPE framework, developed by the International perspective. Evaluation, metrics, and indicators are tools for Network of Research Management Societies (INORMS), offers measuring progress toward a specific vision. If indicators are not a values-based methodology to improve the fairness, aligned with the vision, the organization may start optimizing the transparency, and effectiveness of research evaluation. wrong things. Therefore, it is important that research Traditional approaches often rely on citations, journal impact organizations establish their vision. Measurements and factors, or funding levels. While useful, these indicators can evaluations must be meaningfully aligned with the long-term introduce bias, encourage quantity over quality, and increase vision [4]. pressure on researchers [9]. SCOPE provides a structured five-step process that helps 3.3 research organisations, funders, and managers design evaluations Potential negative impacts of evaluation that promote fairness, inclusion, and responsible use of Evaluation can lead to potential negative effects. An example indicators: of this is the increased administrative burden for all involved, 1. Start with what you value – Evaluation should reflect highlighted by the EU Council Recommendation 2022/2415 [1]. the true priorities of the organisation, not external The process can even lead to an obsession with the pressures. For example, if open science is a key value, quantitative measurement of human performance. In his book indicators might include open access, data sharing, or The Tyranny of Metrics, Jerry Z. Muller warns of the dangers of research transparency. over-reliance on quantitative indicators in assessing performance 2. Consider context – Evaluation must be adapted to its in education, health, science, public administration and other purpose (understanding, self-praise, control, fields. The author criticizes the idea that everything that matters comparison, rewarding) and the unit of assessment can be measured, as such an approach often leads to distortion of (individuals, groups, or institutions). Since practices behavior, manipulation of data and neglect of qualitative aspects differ across disciplines, one-size-fits-all approaches of work. Metrics used without context can undermine the real are unfair. goals of organizations. Muller therefore calls for a thoughtful and 3. Options for evaluating – Both qualitative and critical use of measurement, where numbers do not replace quantitative methods should be combined. Citation judgment and expertise [5]. counts or other metrics should never stand alone; broader contributions such as mentoring, ethics, or 3.4 Guidelines for the evaluation of scientific excellence 4. societal impact should also be considered. Probe deeply – Anticipate unintended consequences, There are an increasing number of global and national such as bias, gaming, or harmful behaviours like over- initiatives focused on driving Responsible Research Assessment publishing. Addressing risks ensures evaluations (RRA). Research organizations are typically evaluated in three remain fair and effective. categories: (1) scientific excellence (research quality), (2) viability and (2) societal relevance (impact). Guidelines for 28 Self-evaluation of Research Organizations in the Field of Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Knowledge Transfer 5. Evaluate your evaluation – Reflect on whether the Table 1: KT Internal Context Indicators. JRC [2]; ASTP process met its goals, improved research culture, and [11]; UK [12], [13]; US [14]. what can be enhanced for the future. SCOPE warns against unconscious bias and discriminatory Indicator JRC ASTP UK US effects in evaluation processes. It emphasizes that evaluations Existence of RO KT & IP X must be co-designed with the evaluated community, tested for Policies discriminatory impact, and continuously checked for unintended RO KT Strategy X consequences. Direct funding via the RO for X By following SCOPE, organisations can foster a more KT e.g. to KTO balanced, responsible, and values-driven research evaluation Indirect funding via the RO X culture [9]. for KT e.g. proof of concept Existence of KTO X Age of KTO X X X 5 Indicators Number of FTE in KTO X X X Indicators are tools used to measure and track progress, Research expenditure in RO X X X X performance, and impact in knowledge transfer and related Number of researchers X X activities. They provide valuable insights for policymakers, research organisations, and industry by capturing both inputs and outputs. A balanced approach combining quantitative metrics Table 2: KT Environment Indicators with qualitative evidence, such as case studies, is essential to Indicator JRC ASTP UK US reflect the complexity and societal value of KT processes. National R&D spend as % Quantitative indicators may also be useful to underpin the case X GDP studies as qualitative indicator. National Higher Education The choice of indicators depends on the exact argument for Expenditure on R&D X which they should provide evidence [10]. Evaluated RO shall (HERD) explain the choice of the indicators as well as their link to RO's National Business aims and strategy. Expenditure on R&D X (BERD) 5.1 Quantitative indicators Availability of public funding Joint Research Center of European Commission (JRC) has programmes to support X defined four groups of quantitative indicators: (1) KT Internal KT/Industry engagement Context Indicators and (2) KT Environment Indicators represent Availability of investment X inputs, while (3) KT Activity Indicators and (4) KT Impact capital Indicators represent outputs [2]. JRC also listed concrete indicators which we present here. We have reviewed three other sources and compared indicators that they use [11], [12], [13] and Table 3: KT Activity Indicators [14]. Indicators are presented in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4. JRC excluded most of Indicator JRC ASTP UK US intellectual property indicators from their metrics. Although they Invention disclosures — X X X are right that the number of patents are less relevant than license number agreements and are according to our information even sometimes Priority patent applications X X recognized by researchers as the end of their knowledge transfer First patents granted X X journey, we believe they are nevertheless important intermediate Active patent families X X indicators. Most common quantitative indicators are research % of Licensed or optioned X X expenditure in RO, licences & assignments — number and gross active patent families revenue to RO and spin–offs — number (identified by 4 sources) Licences & assignments — X X X X as well as age of KTO, number of FTE in KTO, invention number disclosures — number, spin–offs — gross revenue to RO from Licences & assignments — X X X X equity sale, research collaboration agreements with non– gross revenue to RO academic third parties — number and gross revenue to RO, Option agreement X X research contracts with non–academic third parties — number Spin–offs — number X X X X and gross revenue to RO, and consultancy agreements with non– Spin–offs — gross revenue to X X X academic third parties— number and gross revenue to RO (3 RO from equity sale sources). The prevalence of these indicators should be a sign for Research collaboration RO when establishing a quantitative system for self-evaluation. agreements with non– X X X academic third parties — number 29 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia T. Lutman et al. Research collaboration Responsible Research Assessment (RRA) in combination with agreements with non– guidelines of respected organizations like JRC, ASTP, KT UK X X X academic third parties — and AUTM. If not already in place, research organizations’ gross revenue to RO managers should use most common quantitative indicators like Research collaboration research expenditure, licences, spin–offs and others in their self- agreements with non– evaluation system. While quantitative indicators remain useful, X academic third parties — they provide only a partial view of performance. Research length of relationship organizations’ managers should integrate qualitative indicators - Research contracts with non– such as case studies, narrative assessments, and relationship academic third parties — X X X quality - which offers a fuller understanding of KT outcomes and number their societal relevance. Furthermore, they should follow the Research contracts with non– existing frameworks, which provide valuable guidance by academic third parties — X X X emphasising values, context, and reflection in evaluation design. gross revenue to RO Ultimately, self-evaluation must align with the long-term vision Research contracts with non– of research organisations while supporting broader European academic third parties — X goals of innovation, sustainability, and societal benefit. By length of relationship embedding responsible and inclusive self-evaluation practices, Consultancy agreements with KT can more effectively bridge research, industry, and society, non–academic third parties X X X strengthening its role as a driver of economic and social progress. — number Consultancy agreements with Acknowledgments non–academic third parties X X X This project has received funding from the Slovenian — gross revenue to RO Research and Innovation Agency and Ministry of Higher Consultancy agreements with Education, Science and Innovation under grant agreement No. non–academic third parties X V5-24055, project ISERO. — length of relationship Income from courses X References Number of courses held X [1] COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2022/2415 of 2 December 2022 Number of participants that on the guiding principles for knowledge valorisation. Accessed on 27 X August 2025. attend courses https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2022/2415/oj/eng [2] Campbell, A., Cavalade, C., Haunold, C., Karanikic, P., Piccaluga, A., Knowledge Transfer Metrics. Towards a European-wide set of harmonised indicators, Karlsson Dinnetz, M. (Ed.), EUR 30218 EN, Table 4: KT Impact Indicators Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-18885-8, doi: 10.2760/907762 (online), JRC120716 . Indicator [3] Redstone, European Venture Capital. Redstone University Startup Index - JRC ASTP UK US Europe's Trillion Euro Opportunity. Accessed on 27 August 2025. Jobs created in spin–offs X X https://www.redstone.vc/research/redstone-university-startup-index [4] Qualee Technology. Organizational Vision. Accessed on 27 August 2025. Aggregate investment in https://www.qualee.com/hr-glossary/organizational-vision X X [5] spin–offs The Tyranny of Metrics. NED-New edition. Princeton University Press, Products on market 2018. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc7743t. X X [6] The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Accessed on 27 Culture change in RO X August 2025. https://sfdora.org/ Societal benefits X [7] The Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). The Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment. Accessed on 27 August Economic Benefits X 2025. https://coara.eu/agreement/the-agreement-full-text/ [8] Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L. et al. Bibliometrics: The Leiden 5.2 Manifesto for research metrics. Nature 520, 429–431 (2015). Qualitative indicators https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a In line with many strategic directions, quantitative indicators [9] International Network of Research Management Societies - Research Evaluation Group (2023). The SCOPE Framework. The University of need to be combined with qualitative ones. Examples include: Melbourne. Report. https://doi.org/10.26188/21919527.v1 Case studies of successful collaborations (e.g. AUTM’s [10] The Dutch Research Council. The Strategy Evaluation Protocol 2021-2027. Accessed on 27 August 2025. https://www.nwo.nl/en/evaluations- Better World project, CURIE’s “20 years KT success stories”, or nwo-institutes Knowledge Transfer Ireland’s impact cases) [11] Association of Knowledge Transfer Professionals (ASTP). ASTP 2022 Narrative assessments of how KT contributed to outcomes Annual Survey. On the European Knowledge Transfer Landscape Financial year 2020. Accessed on 27 August 2025. like health, civil society engagement, or policy change. https://www.astp4kt.eu/resources/impact/executive-data-report-2022- Relationship quality between universities and industry, fy2020.html [12] Holi, M.T. (2008). Metrics for the Evaluation of Knowledge Transfer highlighted as a key driver of success beyond measurable outputs Activities at Universities. Societal benefits such as improved well-being, new policies, https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:13959826 or civil engagement [2]. [13] Higher Education Statistics Agency. Higher Education Provider Data: Business and Community Interaction. Accessed on 27 August 2025. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/business-community [14] AUTM 2022 Licensing Activity Survey. A Survey of Technology 6 Licensing Related Activity for US Academic and Nonprofit Research Conclusions Institutions. Accessed on 27 August 2025. Effective self-evaluation in knowledge transfer should rely on https://autm.net/AUTM/media/SurveyReportsPDF/2022-US-AUTM- established global and national initiatives focused on driving Licensing-Survey.pdf 30 Strengthening Knowledge and Technology Transfer Ecosystems through Transnational Collaboration: The Case of the STEIDA Project Hülya SABIR* Dilek İSKENDER BALABAN Jaroslav NOSKOVIC Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC The Slovak Centre of Scientific and Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Technical Information Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Bratislava / SLOVAKIA hulyahacisalihoglu@ktu.edu.tr dilekiskender@ktu.edu.tr Jaroslav.noskovic@cvtisr.sk Sedanur KALYONCU Emrah AYVAZ Urska FLORJANCIC Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Jožef Stefan Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Institute Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Ljubljana / SLOVENIA sedanursaglam@ktu.edu.tr emrahayvaz@ktu.edu.tr urska.florjancic@ijs.si Gözde SAĞLAM Samet Can DEĞİRMENCİ Robert B LATNIK Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Jožef Stefan Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Institute Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Ljubljana / SLOVENIA gozdesaglam@ktu.edu.tr sdegirmenci@ktu.edu.tr robert.blatnik@ijs.si Güler Tuğba GÜLTEKİN Kerim SÖNMEZ Marijan LEBAN Technology Transfer ARC Technology Transfer ARC Jožef Stefan Karadeniz Technical University Karadeniz Technical University Institute Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Ljubljana / SLOVENIA gulertugbagultekin@ktu.edu.tr kerimsonmez@ktu.edu.tr marijan.leban@ijs.si Karadeniz Technical University Technology Transfer ARC Ayhan KOÇ Yalçın AYKUT Sanja KIRETA Technology Transfer ARC University of Karadeniz Technical University Zagreb Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Zagreb / CROATIA ayhankoc@ktu.edu.tr yalcin.aykut@ktu.edu.tr skireta@fpz.unizg.hr Karadeniz Technical University Technology Transfer ARC İslam YILDIZ Aleyna AYDIN Orsat LALE Technology Transfer ARC University of Karadeniz Technical University Zagreb Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Zagreb / CROATIA aleynaaydin@ktu.edu.tr islamyildiz@ktu.edu.tr olale@fpz.unizg.hr Karadeniz Technical University Technology Transfer ARC Müslüm Serhat ÜNVER Mariana TANCHEVA Berta PEREZ Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce&Industry Barcelona Chamber of Commerce, Sofia / BULGARIA Industry, Services and Navigation Trabzon / TÜRKİYE mtancheva@bcci.bg Barcelona / SPAIN serhatunver@ktu.edu.tr bperez@cambrabcn.cat Eren YILMAZ Dimitar PAUNOV Technology Transfer ARC Bulgarian Chamber of Vicente ATIENZA Karadeniz Technical University Commerce&Industry Barcelona Chamber of Commerce, Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Sofia / BULGARIA Industry, Services and Navigation erenyilmaz@ktu.edu.tr Projects3@bcci.bg Barcelona / SPAIN vatienza@cambrabcn.cat Beril DEĞERMENCİ Rudolf PASTOR Technology Transfer ARC The Slovak Centre of Scientific and Leonie HEHN Karadeniz Technical University Technical Information Barcelona Chamber of Commerce, Trabzon / TÜRKİYE Bratislava / SLOVAKIA Industry, Services and Navigation berildegermenci@ktu.edu.tr rudolf.pastor@cvtisr.sk Barcelona / SPAIN lhehn@cambrabcn.cat 31 Information Society 2025, 8-10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia H. Sabır et al. ABSTRACT financial opportunities, institutional profiles, stakeholder relationships, and organizational dynamics. This study, conducted within the scope of the STEIDA project, This diversity makes it essential to share good practices, examines the technology transfer (TT) ecosystems of Bulgaria, correctly identify shortcomings, and establish a common Croatia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Türkiye through a development perspective; therefore, a joint analysis and comparative and multidimensional analysis. Using a mixed- evaluation process has been carried out through a multi- methods approach that integrates bibliographic reviews, stakeholder consortium composed of institutions with different stakeholder interviews, and data from the European Innovation regional, institutional, and capacity profiles. This process Scoreboard (EIS 2024) and the Regional Innovation Scoreboard enabled the assessment of the status and comparative (RIS 2023), the study evaluates the institutional structures, key development of TT ecosystems across the consortium's member actors, legal frameworks, financing mechanisms, and the scope countries, as well as their strengths, weaknesses, and shared of services provided by technology transfer offices (TTOs) in challenges. these countries. In this context, the “Joint Comprehensive Study Report of TT The findings reveal significant differences in TT practices in Ecosystem,” prepared within the scope of the STEIDA project terms of innovation performance, TTO structures, stakeholder that aims to strengthen technology transfer ecosystem through an engagement, and service diversity. Slovenia and Spain innovative and holistic approach which will foster national and demonstrate well-institutionalized TT systems characterized by international collaboration among universities, academic staff, strong public–private sector partnerships and diversified service businesses, students, entrepreneurs and other stakeholders by structures, while Bulgaria, Croatia, and Slovakia show more developing/using digital platforms and networks. The project project-based TT models with limited institutional capacity. will alsocontribute to close the gap between academia and Türkiye, on the other hand, is enhancing its capacity through industry through providing students with new competencies [2], industry-oriented policies, state incentives, and regional clusters, addresses the technology transfer ecosystems of Bulgaria, but still requires structural improvements in university–industry Croatia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Türkiye with a detailed integration and the scaling-up of innovations. and comparative approach. The study not only focuses on Common challenges across the countries include limited identifying the current state but also comprehensively evaluates commercialization capacity, entrepreneurship ecosystems that each country’s institutional structure in the field of TT, its key remain largely at the level of public entrepreneurship within actors, operational mechanisms, legal and regulatory universities, the lack of standardized curriculum in TT-related frameworks, financial resources, and their accessibility. In curriculum, and a dependency on project-based funding. The addition, elements such as the organizational structures of study emphasizes that TT is not merely a technical process but technology transfer offices, the scope of services they provide, one that requires multi-actor, multi-layered, and structural their level of interaction with the private sector, stakeholder transformation. Accordingly, it offers strategic recommendations motivations, and capacity-building activities are systematically focused on capacity building, strengthening stakeholder examined [1]. collaborations, and fostering cross-border learning mechanisms. Through this multidimensional analysis, the study clearly reveals the strengths of countries in the field of TT, good practice KEYWORDS examples, as well as structural deficiencies, regional differences, Technology Transfer, Innovation Ecosystems, Comparative and operational shortcomings in the processes. In this way, Analysis, Technology Transfer Offices similarities and differences between countries are identified 1 Introduction recommendations are developed for policymakers, universities, based on concrete data, and applicable, targeted, and measurable Knowledge and technology transfer (K&TT) is a collaborative research institutions, and industry representatives. The findings process that allows scientific findings, knowledge and are also directly related to other components evaluated within the intellectual property to flow from creators, such as universities STEIDA project. In particular, the digital platforms, online and research institutions, to public and private users [1]. Today, training curriculum, and international cooperation networks to be despite the rapid growth of research and development activities developed within the project are designed to respond to the needs globally, the commercialization and social transfer of scientific identified in the report. Thus, the report outputs go beyond a knowledge and technological innovations has not yet reached the purely theoretical assessment of the current situation and desired level. This situation not only limits the potential for contribute directly to strengthening the TT ecosystem in practice, economic growth but also hinders the effective use of resources establishing lasting collaborations among stakeholders, and within innovation ecosystems to create value. TT processes enhancing the capacity for technology-based economic value strengthen this interaction and vary significantly across countries creation. due to differences in legal frameworks, institutional capacities, 2 Methodology ∗The findings are part of the ongoing research at STEIDA Project that funded by The study was conducted within the scope of the STEIDA project Erasmus+ Programme. to comparatively analyze the TT ecosystems of six countries † Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Hülya SABIR , (Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Türkiye). The Karadeniz Technical University Technology Transfer ARC, methodology is based on a multi-stage approach that combines hulyahacisalihoglu@ktu.edu.tr. both quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or techniques [3]. To understand the national context for the TT for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full system in all consortium member countries, it is important to classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must analyze the governance, institutional, legislative, funding, and be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). other relevant aspects related to R&D, technology transfer, and Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia © 20 25 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). http://doi.org/DOI_RECEIVED_AFTER_REVIEW 32 Strengthening Knowledge and Technology Transfer IInformation Society 2025, 8–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Ecosystems through Transnational Collaboration: The Case of the STEIDA Project research infrastructure. All consortium members followed the ecosystems in Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and way that 3 number of desk research, 2 number of map of main Türkiye. The findings demonstrate significant variations not only stakeholders, 6 number of Analysis of existing bibliography and in terms of innovation performance but also in key areas such as references, 22 number of expert interviews, 65 number of TTO structures, legal/institutional frameworks, financial surveys were conducted under the needs of methodology. sustainability, stakeholder motivation, and the scope of services. 2.1. National Data Collection Process 3.1. Innovation Performance and TT Capacity In the first stage, each project partner country conducted a EIS 2024 and RIS 2023 data provide a fundamental reference for comprehensive study on its national TT ecosystem. These identifying the maturity levels of the innovation systems of the national reports elaborated in detail on the current state of TT six countries. Slovenia and Spain fall into the category of processes, key actors, legal and regulatory frameworks, “moderate innovator countries,” while the other four countries financing mechanisms, the role and interest of stakeholders, possess “emerging innovation systems.” However, cluster capacity-building activities, as well as the capacity and services formations in regional hubs create more rapidly developing TT provided by TTOs. Two main data sources were used in this areas in certain countries. The sectoral focus of TT practices also process: differs from country to country: in Türkiye and Slovakia, the • defense, automotive, and electronics sectors are more prominent, Bibliographic review: National and regional policy documents, strategy reports, legal regulations, statistical whereas in Slovenia and Spain, green technology, data, and reference reports published by the European pharmaceuticals, and information technologies stand out more Commission were examined. In particular, the European clearly [4,5]. Innovation Scoreboard (EIS 2024) and the Regional 3.2. Institutionalization Level of TT Structures Innovation Scoreboard (RIS 2023) served as key sources to The prevalence of TTOs, their network structures, and the assess and compare countries’ innovation performances diversity of services they provide emerge as key determinants of [4,5]. countries’ TT capacities. In countries such as Slovenia, Spain, • and Türkiye, TTOs are reinforced by public support structures Stakeholder interviews: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with universities, research centers, industry and, in most cases, operate as visible and accessible institutional organizations, public institutions, entrepreneurship support entities with clearly defined service catalogues. In contrast, in structures, and other relevant actors. These interviews countries such as Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Croatia, TTOs are provided insights into the strengths and weaknesses of TT predominantly project-based structures, with management processes, opportunities, and challenges directly from the capacities that vary in terms of institutional development stakeholder perspective. [6,7,8,9,10,11]. The scope of TTO services is generally limited 2.2. Comparative Analysis Process to administratively oriented activities such as “funding search,” In the second stage, the findings of the national reports were “intellectual property management,” and “EU project support,” consolidated within a common methodological framework [3]. while commercialization and sectoral collaborations remain Using shared indicators and evaluation criteria, the maturity secondary. level, institutional capacity, regulatory compliance, financing 3.3. Strengths and Challenges in TT Processes structure, and stakeholder engagement level of each country’s The table summarized below presents, in a comparative manner, TT ecosystem were comparatively analyzed. In conducting this the strengths and structural limitations of the countries with comparison, indicators such as innovation performance, regional regard to technology transfer: differences, strong sectors, research intensity, public–private cooperation, and the legal/institutional infrastructure for TT Table 1: Strengths and Challenges in TT Ecosystems of — drawn from EIS 2024 and RIS 2023 data Consortium Countries — were used as key references. Country Technology Transfer Challenges in In this analysis, EIS data revealed the overall innovation capacity Strengths Technology Transfer of the countries and their position relative to the European Bulgaria Progress through EU- Weak research average, while RIS data were used to assess the impact of funded programs. commercialization the strengths and weaknesses of innovation ecosystems were Sofia and Plovdiv; funding, and identified not only at the national level but also at the regional increasing regional disparities within countries on TT processes [4,5]. Thus, Emerging tech hubs in infrastructure, limited fragmented TT policies. 2.3. Consolidation of Findings international level. In the final stage, all national reports and EIS/RIS data were partnerships. integrated into a common evaluation matrix. During this process, Croatia Increasing focus on Low private sector the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT green tech and involvement in TT, analysis approach) for each country were identified, and the tourism. EU funding underdeveloped findings were visualized through comparative analysis tables, programs boosting TT university-industry charts, and thematic assessments. and knowledge links, and insufficient snapshot of the current state but also laid the groundwork for insufficient academic- developing evidence-based policy recommendations. These were industry connection. Through this holistic method, the study not only provided a exchange R&D funding, institutions from different regions, profiles, and capacities. Slovakia Strong in automotive Limited domestic strengthened by EIS/RIS data and enriched by the experiences of 3 and electronics sector. investment in R&D and Results EU funding driving low integration of scope of the STEIDA project have clearly revealed the structural development and commercial sectors. diversity and regional differences of the technology transfer (TT) The multi-level comparative analyses carried out within the technology park academic research into 33 Information Society 2025, 8-10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia H. Sabır et al. research Croatia remain largely project-oriented and lack institutional collaboration. sustainability. Türkiye, while striving to increase TT capacity Slovenia Robust through industry-focused policies and public support TT in Challenges in scaling pharmaceuticals and mechanisms, has not yet reached a stage of systematic and deep- up TT activities due to rooted transformation due to the limited institutional depth of green technologies. limited domestic Strong public-private market size and motivation. university–industry collaborations and restricted researcher partnerships and funding. The findings also reveal structural barriers commonly observed active innovation across the consortium countries. These include the weight of hubs. Procedural processes, insufficient incentives for TT within Spain Strong research Gaps in scaling up performance systems, limited engagement with the private outputs and innovations; regional sector, shortages in expert human resources within TTOs, and a innovation linkages. service focus that is oriented more toward project execution than disparities in TT industry is necessary to address not only infrastructural but also institutional and organizational transformation needs. Significant academic- commercialization. At this point, for TT processes to succeed, it effectiveness. collaborations, especially in ICT and Commission, such as Horizon Europe, Erasmus+, EIS, RIS play Furthermore, programs and reports led by the European renewable energy a significant role in the development of TT ecosystems. sectors. However, due to the project-based nature of these supports, they Türkiye Industry-driven TT Insufficient academic- are insufficient for creating lasting capacity. While national with growing tech industry integration, strategies are partially aligned with EU frameworks, in practice, parks and regional challenges in scaling regional inequalities, challenges in accessing funding, and clusters, especially in deficiencies in institutional coordination emerge as the main innovation beyond aerospace. In conclusion, technology transfer should not be regarded solely as a technical process but as a multi-actor, multi-layered defense factors limiting the effectiveness of TT systems. and large companies. 3.4. Stakeholder Engagement and Capacity Building structural reforms, building trust among actors, restructuring mechanism requiring cultural transformation. In addition to The report highlights that a common challenge across all incentive systems, and strengthening cross-border learning countries is the low motivation of academic staff to participate in mechanisms are critical for the development of TT ecosystems. TT activities, with TT generally not being integrated into institutional performance indicators. In addition, the support for REFERENCES fostering students’ entrepreneurial potential remains limited in all countries; only a few universities (e.g., Zagreb, Istanbul) have [1] WIPO (2025). World Intellectual Property Organization, Knowledge and established structural support models. Technology Transfer, https://www.wipo.int/en/web/technology- transfer#:~:text=Knowledge%20and%20technology%20transfer%20(K From a capacity-building perspective, a formal TT curriculum is %26TT,to%20public%20and%20private%20users. Accessed on: largely lacking for both TTO personnel and researchers. September 17, 2025. [2] STEIDA (2025). Strengthening Technology Transfer Ecosystem through Expertise in areas such as intellectual property management, Innovative and Digital Approaches, STEIDA Project Objective, patent portfolio strategy, or licensing is mostly outsourced, http://www.steidaproject.net/about-2/ . Accessed on: September 17, 2025. which limits the sustainable development of the TT process. [3] STEIDA Project (2024). Joint Comprehensive Study Report of TT 3.5. Additional Observations and Trends Ecosystem Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Türkiye, Although the maturity levels of the ecosystems vary, EU https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_3lehN.pdf . Accessed on: August 15, 2025. programs in the consortium countries serve as key drivers of [4] European Union (2024). European Innovation Scoreboard 2024, structural transformation. However, the project-based nature of https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/8a4a4a1f-3e68- 11ef-ab8f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en . Accessed on: August 15, 2025. these supports creates gaps in the development of sustainable [5] European Commission (2023). Regional Innovation Scoreboard 2023, strategies. Strengthening institutional network structures relative https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/c849333f-25db- to their current status would enhance knowledge sharing and 11ee-a2d3-01aa75ed71a1/language-en . Accessed on: August 15, 2025 promote joint learning among TTOs. [6] STEIDA Project (2024). Comprehensive Study of Technology Transfer 4 Ecosystem Country: Slovenia Discussion https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_qztV6.pdf . Accessed on: August 15, The findings of this study clearly demonstrate that TT systems in 2025 [7] STEIDA Project (2024). Comprehensive Study of Technology Transfer Europe show varying levels of structural and functional maturity. Ecosystem Country: Spain. TT processes are not limited solely to institutional capacity or https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_BxFuD.pdf Accessed on: August 15, 2025 regulatory adequacy; they are also directly related to cultural [8] STEIDA Project (2024). Comprehensive Study of Technology Transfer norms, financial sustainability, academic motivation, and private Ecosystem Country: Türkiye. sector expectations. In this context, both common trends and https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_tOO9M.pdf Accessed on: August 15, country-specific dynamics are noteworthy among the countries 2025 examined within the STEIDA project. Ecosystem [9] STEIDA Project (2024). Comprehensive Study of Technology Transfer Country: Bulgaria. In countries with relatively more advanced innovation systems, https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_hfSpN.pdf Accessed on: August 15, such as Spain and Slovenia, the institutionalization level of TT 2025 [10] STEIDA Project (2024). Comprehensive Study of Technology Transfer structures, the prevalence of public – private sector partnerships, Ecosystem Country: Slovakia. and the diversity of TTO services are higher. In these countries, https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_SbAxq.pdf Accessed on: August 15, TT activities are conducted through an integrated approach that 2025 goes beyond mere project management and also encompasses [11] STEIDA Project (2024). Comprehensive Study of Technology Transfer Ecosystem Country: Croatia. intellectual property protection, spin-off support, and licensing https://www.ktu.edu.tr/dosyalar/tto_tf6l5.pdf Accessed on: August 15, processes. In contrast, TT systems in Bulgaria, Slovakia, and 2025 34 Evaluating Skill Development and Collaboration Outcomes in the INDUSAC Project Špela Kunej† Duško Odić Urška Mrgole Marjeta Trobec Jožef Stefan Institute Jožef Stefan Institute Jožef Stefan Institute Jožef Stefan Institute Ljubljana, Slovenia Ljubljana, Slovenia Ljubljana, Slovenia Ljubljana, Slovenia spela.kunej@ijs.si dusko.odic@ijs.si urska.mrgole@ijs.si marjeta.trobec@ijs.si Abstract need for student integration and for overcoming cultural and The INDUSAC project, launched in 2022 under the Horizon Conventional collaboration models are often lengthy, resource- organisational challenges [1,2]. Europe framework, innovatively brought together industry and intensive, and less accessible to widening countries. Evidence on academia by engaging students in solving real-world industry short, challenge-driven projects is limited, even though problems. Coordinated by the Jožef Stefan Institute, INDUSAC transversal skills such as negotiation, teamwork, and conflict connected companies with international and interdisciplinary management are crucial for employability and often difficult to teams of students and researchers for co-creation projects lasting develop in classroom settings [3]. Moreover, evaluation practices 4 to 8 weeks and executed as several consecutive calls for in such short-term collaborations remain underdeveloped, students and researchers to apply. This article evaluates student particularly in terms of capturing engagement and response rates engagement during the first two calls (February 2024 and June [4]. 2024) through surveys conducted before and after the co-creation Alongside skills, collaboration also contributes to knowledge projects. Results show high initial student confidence and transfer by facilitating knowledge exchange, collaborative negotiation and international teamwork. Satisfaction with the shows that while universities and companies recognise the process and the online platform among both students and importance of collaboration, students are often only indirectly measurable improvements in professional skills such as problem-solving, and cross-border learning. Previous research companies increased between the first and second call, indicating involved, through workshops or mediated research projects, with effective project adaptation based on student / researcher and limited access to real-world industrial problems [5,6]. company feedback. Companies valued student contributions for INDUSAC explicitly addresses this gap by integrating students creativity but noted a need for more market viability. These directly into co-creation with industry, enabling not only skill findings confirm the effectiveness of INDUSAC's co-creation acquisition but also meaningful knowledge transfer [7]. model and highlight areas for future improvement, ultimately This study evaluates INDUSAC, launched in 2022 under preparing students for global careers. Horizon Europe, and argues that short, human-centred projects Keywords both enhance student skills and generate innovative solutions for companies. Our contribution is twofold: (1) we assess student INDUSAC project, Industry-academia collaboration, Student skill development and company satisfaction through pre- and engagement, Skill development post-project surveys; and (2) we situate INDUSAC within broader debates on effective collaboration and knowledge transfer. 1 Introduction Industry–academia collaboration is widely recognised as a driver 1.1 Project Context of innovation, knowledge transfer, and competitiveness in Funded by Horizon Europe (Grant Agreement No. 101070297), Europe. Initiatives such as the EIT Knowledge and Innovation INDUSAC fosters rapid, challenge-driven collaboration between Communities (KICs) and Erasmus+ demonstrate the value of academia and industry [8-10]. Coordinated by the Jožef Stefan integrating academic expertise with industrial practice. Research Institute, the consortium includes universities, research highlights both enabling factors and barriers, particularly the institutes, clusters, and companies. International, interdisciplinary teams of 3–6 students and researchers addressed † company challenges over 4–8 weeks, gaining practical corresponding author experience while promoting cross-border cooperation. Attention Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or was given to inclusiveness, gender balance, and the participation classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed of both EU member states and associated countries, with a focus for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must on EU widening countries. Financial support was provided for be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). students who completed projects. Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). In the first two calls (February and June 2024), companies published 131 challenges. Student and researcher teams 35 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia S. Kunej et al. submitted 64 motivation letters, 37 were approved, and 25 assessment of the INDUSAC project’s effectiveness in achieving projects were completed. This combination of student its goals of enhancing student capabilities, developing innovative development and industrial collaboration highlights solutions to industry challenges, and fostering robust INDUSAC’s dual contribution to employability and knowledge collaborative relationships between academia and industry. transfer. 2 Methods The evaluation of the INDUSAC project utilized surveys administered to students and researchers before and after each co-creation project, as well as to companies after each project. The aim was to capture changes in skills, satisfaction with the process, and company evaluations of the solutions produced. Survey design. Before starting projects, all student and researcher team members completed an initial questionnaire to assess their baseline competencies, including communication, negotiation, conflict management, analytical and critical thinking, teamwork, creativity, time management, and international collaboration. After completing projects, Figure 1: Evaluability of questionnaires after the cut-off participants filled in a follow-up survey to measure changes in date for students and researchers. The x-axis shows different these skills and to assess satisfaction with the INDUSAC process stages of project participation (before and after each call, and and platform (usability, clarity, support). Companies, after overall), while the y-axis indicates the number of submitted receiving final solutions, completed surveys evaluating questionnaires. Bars are split between evaluable (complete) and creativity, innovativeness, market potential, quality of work, and non-evaluable (incomplete) responses, measuring participant satisfaction with the process and platform. engagement and survey completion rate. Participation and response rates. Across the first two calls (February and June 2024), more than 100 students and Participant engagement. Engagement was first assessed researchers participated. Students and researchers came from a through the evaluability of completed questionnaires at the start and end of the co-creation projects. As shown in Figure 1, diverse range of geographical locations, including Hungary, participation was strong: in the first call, 71 pre-project and 56 Slovenia, Croatia, Finland, Lithuania, Cyprus, Georgia, Serbia, post-project responses were valid; in the second call, 61 pre- Germany, Romania, North Macedonia, Tunisia, Bosnia and project and 44 post-project responses were valid. This Herzegovina, Morocco, Poland, Türkiye, France, Moldova, corresponds to an overall response rate of 86% before projects Kosovo, and Bulgaria. In the first call, 71 valid pre-project and began and 73% after completion. While the decline in post- 56 post-project responses were received; in the second, 61 and project responses suggests survey fatigue, it nonetheless reflects 44, respectively. This corresponds to 86% pre-project and 73% a robust commitment, considering the short duration and post-project response rates, showing strong engagement at the intensity of the projects. This is consistent with findings in other outset and some attrition due to survey fatigue. Companies challenge-driven initiatives, where sustaining engagement provided 9 valid responses in the first round and 8 in the second. throughout the process remains a methodological challenge [2]. The presence of incomplete submissions post-project raises Data analysis. Survey responses were analysed with descriptive interpretive questions. Some students may have abandoned statistics. Improvements in competencies were calculated as surveys due to waning motivation, while others may have percentage differences between average pre- and post-scores on struggled with clarity or usability. Preliminary qualitative a five-point Likert scale. Focus was placed on transversal skills feedback suggests both factors: some respondents found the with lower initial self-assessments (negotiation, conflict platform navigation non-intuitive, while others noted a lack of management, international teamwork), since these represent clarity in survey expectations. Distinguishing between areas where knowledge transfer between students and companies motivational and structural causes is crucial for improving future is most visible. Company evaluations were aggregated across implementations. innovativeness, creativity, and market relevance. Skill development. A central aim of INDUSAC was to enhance transversal skills. Students and researchers initially This mixed-survey methodology enabled comparison of student rated their skills highly, with an average of ~86%, reflecting self-assessments with company feedback, providing a holistic view of INDUSAC’s effectiveness in fostering skill development strong self-confidence. Despite this high baseline, measurable improvements were observed, as shown in Figure 2. Overall, an and delivering useful outcomes. average skill enhancement was ~4%. A more detailed analysis (Figure 3) highlights growth in negotiation (+7%), conflict management (+6%), and experience working with companies 3 Results and Discussion and international teams (+9–15%). These competencies are The analysis of the INDUSAC project involved examining particularly relevant for employability and align with survey data gathered from participating students, researchers, INDUSAC’s goal of providing a practical, internationalized and companies. This section details results related to participant professional context. In some cases, self-assessments decreased engagement, skill enhancement, satisfaction with the INDUSAC slightly, which may indicate initial overestimation and platform and process, and company evaluations of delivered subsequent recalibration when exposed to real-world challenges. solutions. Together, these factors provide a comprehensive 36 Evaluating Skill Development and Collaboration Outcomes in the Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia INDUSAC Project These results directly address the gap noted in the literature: while many collaboration models demonstrate learning benefits, few provide systematic evidence of skill development in short- term formats [1-3]. INDUSAC demonstrates that even brief interventions can yield tangible improvements, especially in international teamwork and company interaction. In addition, these skill gains form the basis for effective knowledge transfer, since negotiation, conflict resolution, and cross-cultural collaboration are essential for translating academic insights into industry practice [5-7]. Figure 3: Enhanced skills in negotiation and conflict management, experience in collaborating with companies, and working with international teams of the co-creation team members (before and after the co-creation project). The x- axis identifies four skill categories (negotiation, conflict management, collaboration with companies, international teamwork), and the y-axis displays average skill scores before and after the project in percentage. Company evaluations. Company satisfaction also improved notably. As shown in Figure 5, overall ratings increased from 77% in the first call to 87% in the second. Companies particularly valued creativity and innovativeness, while also calling for stronger market viability in delivered solutions. These observations confirm earlier feasibility analyses [11], which reported that while companies were enthusiastic about student creativity, they sought clearer communication and stronger connections to practical outcomes. The trend observed here, increased satisfaction after methodological refinements, indicates that INDUSAC has matured to better align with Figure 2: Skills of the co-creation team members before company expectations. Importantly, by providing innovative but and after submitting the co-creation project solution. The x- not always fully market-ready solutions, INDUSAC lays the axis lists specific soft skills, and the y-axis shows the average groundwork for knowledge transfer: student ideas and prototypes self-assessment scores on a standardized scale (a whole number can be refined with company support into sustainable industrial out of 5, expressed as %). Two bars per skill represent student outcomes. evaluations before and after project participation, measuring perceived skill development. Satisfaction with process and platform. Students’ and researchers’ satisfaction with the INDUSAC process and platform increased between calls, as shown in Figure 4. Satisfaction with the process rose from 77% to 86%, while platform satisfaction increased from 81% to 87%. The positive change reflects successful adaptations based on first-round feedback, particularly improvements in usability and support materials. These outcomes reinforce the importance of iterative refinement [2]. They also underline how digital platforms can serve as enablers of knowledge transfer by keeping collaboration materials, feedback, and ideas accessible for later development. Figure 4: Satisfaction levels regarding the process and platform for co-creation teams. The x-axis distinguishes between satisfaction with the process and platform for each of the two calls, while the y-axis presents the percentage of students who reported satisfaction. Bars show the comparison between the first and second calls, highlighting overall improvements in participant experience. 37 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia S. Kunej et al. Overall interpretation. The main insights demonstrate that benefits illustrates how such collaborations provide value for all the INDUSAC project has been successful in achieving its stakeholders. In addition to skills development and satisfaction, primary objectives. Despite high baseline self-assessments, the project plays a significant role in knowledge transfer. By students and researchers improved key transversal skills. Both facilitating direct collaboration between students and companies students and companies expressed increasing satisfaction with on real-world challenges, INDUSAC promotes the exchange of the process and platform, reflecting the value of continuous knowledge, methodologies, and potential solutions that can be improvement. Companies recognised the innovativeness of further refined and integrated into industrial practice. Direct student contributions, though the call for stronger market viability suggests a need to integrate more structured support for student–company collaboration creates conditions for business analysis in future rounds. sustainable knowledge transfer, where ideas are co-created, Taken together, these findings validate INDUSAC as a critically tested, and adapted into practical industrial contexts. replicable and scalable co-creation model. Beyond skills and Overall, INDUSAC demonstrates effectiveness as a replicable satisfaction, the project also strengthens knowledge transfer by model at the intersection of higher education, industry, and linking collaborative problem-solving with structures for follow- innovation. Key lessons include the importance of sustained up and application, ensuring that innovations generated within engagement, feedback-driven refinement, and inclusive short-term projects can be sustained and further developed. participation. Future work should strengthen market-oriented analysis and assess long-term impacts on student careers and company innovation. Acknowledgments Work described in this manuscript has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe Programme under grant agreement No 101070297. References [1] Kempf, C., Albers, A., Hellwig, I., Bastian, A., & Ritzer, K. (2023). Success factors and barriers in industry–academia collaborations – a descriptive model. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, V002T02A005. [2] Bastian, A., Kempf, C., Rudolph, P., & Albers, A. (2024). Breaking cultural barriers: an integrated methodology for challenge-driven co- Figure 5: Companies’ evaluation of solutions and the creation projects. Proceedings of the Design Society, 4, 885–894. [3] Ejubovic, A., Avsec, S., Flogie, A., & Dolenc, K. (2017). State of work of the co-creation teams. Of the categories surveyed, University–Business Cooperation in Slovenia. University–Business Innovativeness, Creativity, Improvement over existing solutions, Cooperation in Europe Project Report. [4] Kempf, C., Albers, A., & Bastian, A. (2024). Evaluation practices in Market Potential, and Relevance refer to the solution delivered by the co-creation team, whereas Soundness, Quality of Work, Design Society Special Issue. short-term industry–academia projects: Response rates and engagement. and Satisfaction refer to the work done by the co-creation team. [5] Morrison, A., & Pattinson, P. (2020). University–Industry collaboration The x-axis presents company evaluations from the first and in practice: Patterns and pathways. Journal of Technology Transfer, second calls, while the y-axis indicates the percentage of 45(5), 1234–1248. [6] Ratten, V. (2016). Knowledge transfer, entrepreneurship, and company representatives who expressed satisfaction. The two international collaboration: A framework for competitiveness. lines represent average satisfaction scores for first and second International Journal of Technology Management, 72(4), 217–229. calls, capturing industry perceptions of solution quality and [7] Cunningham, J.A., & Link, A. (2014). Fostering university–industry R&D collaboration in European contexts . Research Policy, 43(6), 1239– teamwork. 1249. [8] INDUSAC (2023). Available at: https://indusac.eu/indusac/ [9] Odić, D., Mrgole, U., & Trobec, M. (2023). New initiatives for 4 knowledge transfer between industry and academia: the INDUSAC Conclusions Project. Proceedings of the 16th International Technology Transfer The INDUSAC project presents a strong case for integrating Conference, Information Society – IS 2023, vol. E: 58–61. [10] Odić, D., Mrgole, U., Trobec, M. (2023) New forms of upskilling in students into co-creative processes that bridge academia and international cooperation between students and industry. Proceedings of industry. Although students and researchers initially rated their the Education in Information Society conference, Information Society - IS skills highly, post-project evaluations revealed clear [11] 2023, vol. G: 119-123. Odić, D., Mrgole, U., & Trobec, M. (2024). Feasibility analysis for the improvements in several competencies. Negotiation skills new mechanism of knowledge transfer within the INDUSAC project. increased by 7%, conflict management by 6%, and international Proceedings of the 17th International Technology Transfer Conference, Information Society – IS 2024, vol. E: 39-42. teamwork by up to 15%. These gains confirm the value of experiential, collaborative learning and show that short, focused project cycles can enhance professional readiness in areas often difficult to develop in traditional academic settings. Student reflections indicate that even confident participants recognised growth, underscoring INDUSAC’s value as a developmental tool regardless of starting level. Companies likewise reported rising satisfaction with both the process and the solutions, appreciating creativity and innovation while calling for greater market orientation. This balance of skill enhancement and practical 38 Digital Persona Generation: Historical Figure Emulation in Learning Velu Kaliappan velumail@gmail.com Abstract rhetorical style to provide an immersive, voice-interactive educational environment. This Machine Learning paper presents an innovative pipeline for We investigate three core hypotheses: generating interactive digital personas of historical figures, 1) H1: Historical Accuracy – Responses are factually accurate aiming to enhance educational engagement. Our system and temporally consistent with Pliny’s writings. leverages large language models (LLMs) and Retrieval- 2) H2: Engagement and Learning Efficacy – Dialogue-based Augmented Generation (RAG) to ensure factual accuracy and learning enhances engagement and knowledge retention employs sophisticated voice synthesis for authentic compared to traditional methods. conversational experiences. A core aspect of our approach 3) H3: Stylistic Authenticity – The system emulates Pliny’s involves adaptive prompt engineering, which serves as a crucial tone, language, and rhetorical style convincingly. feedback mechanism to continuously refine the historical Initial evaluations indicate strong alignment with all figure’s knowledge base and conversational tone, ensuring high hypotheses, including contextually grounded answers and fidelity to the original persona. This iterative adaptation enables engaging voice-based interaction. This approach transforms engage with historical context through emulated figures like passive content consumption into interactive, personalized personalized learning interactions, allowing users to deeply historical learning. Pliny the Elder. Index Terms—Conversational AI, Historical Simulation, A. Relevance to Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), Educational Technology, Digital Humanities, Language Models, Virtual The modular framework—comprising speech recognition, Persona, Interactive Learning, AI in Education, Prompt retrieval, prompting, and synthesis—is transferable to domains Engineering, Textto-Speech Synthesis, Knowledge Grounding, beyond history, such as healthcare training, cultural preservation, NLP for History, Whisper ASR, ElevenLabs TTS and corporate knowledge management. Additionally, creating Introduction historically grounded digital personas raises intellectual property considerations related to synthesized voices, digital likenesses, Traditional history education often relies on passive methods and curated corpora, connecting educational innovation with such as textbooks, lectures, and rote memorization, which can technology transfer and IP governance. hinder engagement and knowledge retention, particularly in ancient history due to cultural and linguistic gaps. Students frequently struggle to connect meaningfully with historical Related Work content, reducing motivation and learning efficacy. AI-driven educational systems, including virtual tutors and Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) offer new conversational agents, enable dynamic, personalized learning opportunities to transform history education. Conversational and immediate feedback [1]–[4]. agents powered by large language models (LLMs) can bring historical figures ”to life” as interactive, personality-driven A. Conversational Agents and Digital Personas digital personas. These reconstructions simulate speech, behavior, and ideologies based on historical texts, enabling Projects like SimSensei and New Dimensions in Testimony use dynamic, dialogue-based learning experiences. AI avatars to simulate emotionally aware or historical This paper presents a framework for reconstructing the interactions [2], [5], though often relying on firsthand recordings. persona of Pliny the Elder, a Roman author and naturalist, using Text-based approaches, such as Living Memories, generate prompt engineering, and voice synthesis. The system grounds digital representations from archival content [6]–[9]. a hybrid approach of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), responses in verified historical content and emulates Roman-era B. Virtual Heritage and History Education Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or AI supports digital humanities by preserving historical narratives classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed and enabling interactive learning [10]–[12]. Projects like for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must REACH, Europeana, and Time Machine provide interactive be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). timelines and story-driven modules [13]–[15]. LLMbased Information Society 2025, 6 – 10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia tutoring shows potential for higher-order reasoning and © 20 25 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). curriculum-specific contextualization [?], [16]–[20]. 39 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia V. Kaliappan C. Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Knowledge Grounding D. Persona Simulation Approaches RAG frameworks embed queries and source texts in a shared (1) Fine-Tuning: Supervised training on Q-A pairs from vector space to ground LLM responses in factual knowledge, Naturalis Historia using cross-entropy loss, achieving tonal reducing hallucination and maintaining style [21]–[26]. alignment but limited factual generalization. (2) RAG: Integrates document retrieval into generation, D. Gap in the Literature grounding responses in top-k passages to reduce hallucination: Few studies integrate RAG, persona simulation, and interactive Context = TopK (sim(Embed(q),Embed(di))) dialogue for ancient history. Most digital heritage work focuses on static visualization or archives [27]. Our approach uniquely (3) Prompt Engineering: Few-shot examples and stylistic combines semantically indexed historical texts, realtime voice meta-instructions capture Pliny’s tone but may struggle with synthesis, and prompt engineering to create an interactive, complex queries. educational experience with a Roman scholar. E. Hybrid Strategy Methodology Combining RAG + Prompting ensures factual accuracy via A. Overview retrieval and stylistic authenticity via prompt templates [25]. Table I compares methods. The system enables immersive, historically grounded conversations with Pliny the Elder using four modules: Table 1: Persona Simulation Methods Comparison Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), Prompt-Conditioned Language Model, and Method Factual Stylistic Flexibility Text-to-Speech (TTS) synthesis (Figure 1). Accuracy Match Fine-tuning Medium High Low B. Data Collection and Preprocessing Prompting Low High High RAG High Medium High Naturalis Historia [28] served as the primary knowledge source. Chapters were treated as atomic documents, cleaned, segmented, RAG + High High High embedded with Sentence-BERT [29], and indexed in a FAISS Prompting vector database [30] for retrieval. F. Illustrative Dialogue C. System Architecture Table 2: Sample Interaction with AI Pliny User What are the main uses of sand in construction? Pliny Sand mixed with lime strengthens mortar; river and (AI) sea sand require one-third lime, fossil sand one- fourth. Ground pottery fragments further reinforce structures, as observed in Rome. Evaluation A. Automated Evaluation Using 200 in-domain and 100 out-of-scope questions [31], results were: • In-domain accuracy: 194/200 (97%) • Out-of-domain: 100% correctly declined Table 3: Error Types in In-Domain Responses Error Type Count Figure 1. System architecture for Pliny the Elder simulation. Incorrectly Declared Unavailable 4 Misinformation from Same Chapter 2 40 Digital Persona Generation: Historical Figure Emulation in Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Learning B. Human Evaluation (Proposed) Conclusion This work presents a framework for AI-powered historical Learning Efficacy: Pre- and post-tests comparing control (text) personas using RAG, prompt engineering, and speech synthesis. vs. test (AI dialogue) groups. The system successfully reconstructs Pliny the Elder’s Engagement: Post-session Likert survey (1–5) on engagement, knowledge and voice, achieving 97% accuracy for in-domain comprehension, and usability. queries and perfect rejection of out-of-scope questions, with sub- Stylistic Fidelity: Participants compare AI-generated vs. original 2.1s response latency. excerpts on tone, language, and historical alignment. By combining semantically indexed texts, context-aware language modeling, and voice synthesis, the approach ensures C. Ethical Considerations factual, temporally consistent, and stylistically guided interactions. All synthetic content is clearly marked as artificial. The model While modernized syntax slightly reduces historical supplements, but does not replace, scholarly sources. authenticity, it enhances readability and learner engagement. Overall, the framework demonstrates the feasibility of immersive, interactive historical learning, opening avenues for Results and Discussion AI-driven education in digital humanities, museums, and cultural A. In-Scope Knowledge Accuracy heritage platforms. Future work will refine stylistic fidelity, The system correctly answered 194 of 200 in-domain questions extend to other historical figures, and incorporate comprehensive from Naturalis Historia (97% accuracy), with errors limited to human-subject evaluations. missed context (4) or minor factual inaccuracies (2) (Table IV). All 100 out-of-scope questions were correctly declined, Future Work demonstrating effective knowledge confinement. While the current implementation successfully demonstrates the Table 4: In-Scope Accuracy Evaluation feasibility of recreating historically grounded conversational agents, there are several promising directions for future research Result Type and system development. Count Percentage Correct Responses 194 97% Missed Context A. Expansion to Multiple Historical Figures 4 2% Misinformation One of the most immediate opportunities lies in extending the 2 1% system to support multiple historical personas. Expanding B. Tone and Style beyond Pliny the Elder to include figures such as Socrates, Generated responses maintained factual fidelity but used Cleopatra, Leonardo da Vinci, or Confucius would allow users simplified modern English rather than Pliny’s complex Roman to explore diverse viewpoints across different eras and sentence structures. This trade-off improved readability and civilizations. This would require the creation of distinct RAG engagement, although it slightly reduced stylistic authenticity. pipelines, vector databases, and persona-specific prompt templates for each character. A central challenge in this C. System Responsiveness expansion would be ensuring that each virtual figure maintains Average response latency across 50 interactions was under 2.1 not only factual accuracy but also individual linguistic style, seconds, confirming near real-time performance suitable for philosophical perspective, and cultural context. interactive educational settings. B. Cross-Cultural and Multilingual Support D. Insights and Implications Another avenue of future work involves supporting interactions Accuracy vs. Style: High factual precision was balanced with in multiple languages. For example, recreating conversations simplified language for user comprehension. Informal testing with Pliny in Latin, alongside translations in English, could suggested this trade-off enhanced engagement. enhance authenticity and facilitate language learning. This would RAG Effectiveness: Retrieval-augmented generation reliably necessitate incorporating multilingual language models and grounded responses in source texts and prevented hallucinations, translating source corpora while preserving semantic integrity. preserving temporal and historical integrity. Moreover, cultural nuance in translation and tone must be Educational Potential: AI-driven historical personas can carefully handled to maintain the integrity of the historical transform learning from passive text consumption to active, persona. dialogic exploration, offering immersive experiences with figures like Pliny. C. Fine-Grained Stylistic Modeling Limitations: Fine-grained control over rhetorical style, humor, While current prompt engineering techniques allow for general and philosophical nuance remains limited. Formal human stylistic tuning, more sophisticated methods could be developed evaluations and broader demographic testing are planned for to capture specific rhetorical patterns, humor, dialect, and tone future work. unique to each persona. This could include training specialized adapters or using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) to better align generated outputs with ancient writing 41 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia V. Kaliappan styles. Additionally, integrating large-scale corpora of classical [4] X. Zhou et al., “Designing ai-based tutors for human learning,” literature could further improve stylistic realism. International Journal of AI in Education, 2020. [5] D. Traum et al., “New dimensions in testimony: Digitally preserving a holocaust survivor’s interactive storytelling,” in LNCS, vol. 9445, 2015, D. Human Evaluation at Scale pp. 269–281. [6] P. Pataranutaporn et al., “Living memories: Ai-generated characters A critical limitation of the present work is the lack of largescale as digital mementos,” in Proceedings of the 28th IUI Conference, 2023. user studies. Future work will involve conducting controlled [7] A. Martino, F. Rossi, and G. Santucci, “A humanistic perspective on experiments with learners across different educational levels, digital twins: Bridging the gap between humanities and engineering,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Digital Humanism. ranging from middle school to university. These studies will ACM, 2021, pp. 23–30. assess learning outcomes, engagement metrics, usability, and [8] Y. Liu, N. Muennighoff, H. BehnamGhader, et al., “Pre-train, prompt, and predict: A systematic survey of prompting methods in overall educational impact. In particular, comparisons between natural language processing,” in Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting AI-based interaction and traditional textbook-based learning will of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2023). ACL, provide quantitative insight into the system’s pedagogical 2023, pp. 3930–3970. [9] A. Haque, B. Zhang, A. Efros, A. Holynski, and A. Kanazawa, effectiveness. “Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2022), 2022. [Online]. Available: https://dreamfusion3d.github.io/ E. Ethical Safeguards and Historical Fidelity [10] D. Ritchie et al., “Ai and the humanities: A literature review,” Digital As the system is extended to simulate more figures, ensuring Scholarship in the Humanities, 2019. [11] X. Chen et al., “Towards ai-powered digital heritage,” Journal on historical fidelity and ethical integrity becomes paramount. Computing and Cultural Heritage, 2020. Mechanisms must be implemented to detect and prevent [12] L. Alabdulkarim et al., “The role of artificial intelligence in anachronistic statements, hallucinations, or culturally insensitive enhancing history education,” Education and Information Technologies, 2021. outputs. Additionally, the interface should clearly indicate that [13] “Reach project - reading and experiencing augmented cultural heritage,” the persona is AI-generated and that any information provided https://www.reach-culture.eu, 2018. [14] “Europeana collections,” https://www.europeana.eu, 2021. should be cross-verified with scholarly resources when used for [15] “Time machine: Big data of the past,” https://www.timemachine.eu, academic purposes. 2020. [16] S. Liu et al., “A survey on question answering: Tasks, methods and future directions,” Computer Science Review, 2022. F. Educational Integration and Deployment [17] J. Devlin et al., “Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers Future work also includes integrating this system into learning for language understanding,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805, 2018. [18] A. Chowdhery, et. al., “Palm: Scaling language modeling with pathways,” management platforms, museum kiosks, and virtual reality in Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning environments. Instructors could use the AI personas to create (ICML 2022). PMLR, 2022, pp. 38 765–38 807. [Online]. Available: https: //proceedings.mlr.press/v162/chowdhery22a.html curriculum-aligned conversations or simulate debates between [19] N. Khan, K. H. Siddique, and S. Lee, “Ai and cybersecurity: From theory historical figures. Moreover, real-time analytics could be used to to practice,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 10 394–10 417, 2021. monitor learner progress, adapt responses based on user history, [20] X. Wang, J. Wei, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, F. Xia, E. Chi, Q. V. Le, and D. Zhou, “What makes good in-context examples for gpt models?” and personalize educational journeys. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 11, pp. 50–66, 2023. [21] P. Lewis et al., “Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledgeintensive G. Model Optimization and Scalability nlp tasks,” in NeurIPS, 2020. To support broader adoption, performance optimization will be [22] G. Izacard and E. Grave, “Leveraging passage retrieval with generative necessary. Reducing latency while preserving response quality is models for open domain question answering,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.01282, 2020. crucial for scalability, especially in bandwidthconstrained [23] G. Mialon, R. Dess`ı, M. Lomeli, P.-E. Mazar´e, A. Piktus, V. Sanh, environments. Research into model distillation, edge deployment T. Wang, T. Wolf, T. Lacroix, H. Jegou, E. Grave, A. Joulin, and G. Lample, “Augmented language models: a survey,” Transactions of smaller LLMs, or serverless architectures could help bring on Machine Learning Research, 2023, openReview preprint. [Online]. such conversational agents to under-resourced regions and Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ufBOo6vgWJh [24] Z. Zhang, A. Xu, R. Zhang, H. Zhao, and Z. Yang, “Ret-llm: classrooms globally. Towards retrieval-augmented large language models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.11151, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308. H. Simulation of Historical Ecosystems 11151 [25] T. B. Brown, et. al. B. Mann, N. Ryder, M. Subbiah, J. D. Kaplan, et al, In the long term, the framework could evolve into simulating “Language models are few-shot learners,” in Advances entire historical ecosystems rather than individual personas. This in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2020), vol. 33, 2020, pp. 1877–1901. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.neurips. would allow users to engage in conversations with multiple cc/paper/2020/hash/1457c0d6bfcb4967418bfb8ac142f64a-Abstract.html figures across time, participate in historical reenactments, or [26] J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, E. H. Chi, Q. V. explore socio-political dynamics through AI-driven discourse. Le, and D. Zhou, “Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Such simulations could bring unparalleled depth to history Systems (NeurIPS 2022), vol. 35, 2022, pp. 24 824–24 837. [Online]. education by enabling experiential, narrative-based exploration Available: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper files/paper/2022/hash/ b9cfe8b61c2b1e06fbbf0eaf7bb8c2b0-Abstract-Conference.html of the past. [27] J. Thomas et al., “Ai for cultural heritage: Challenges and opportunities,” Journal of AI and Society, 2021. References [28] P. the Elder, “The natural history,” 77 AD. [29] N. Reimers and I. Gurevych, “Sentence-bert: Sentence embeddings using siamese bert-networks,” arXiv:1908.10084, 2019. [1] [30] J. Johnson, M. Douze, and H. J´egou, “Billion-scale similarity search R. Winkler and M. S¨ollner, “Chatbots in education: A systematic literature review,” in Academy of Management Proceed with gpus,” in IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 2019. ings, 2020. [2] D. DeVault et al., “Simsensei kiosk: a virtual human interviewer for [31] S. B. Mallick and L. Kilpatrick, “Gemini 2.0: Flash, flash-lite and pro,” healthcare decision support,” in AAMAS, 2014, pp. 1061–1068. https://developers.googleblog.com/en/gemini-2-family-expands/, 2025, [3] C. Kulkarni et al., “Peerstudio: Rapid peer feedback emphasizes google Developer Blog revision and improves performance,” in Learning@ Scale, 2015. 42 Trends in Brain-Computer Interface Technologies: Patent Analysis Rahela Anič ič Č andrlič PhD. Gregor Jagodič PhD Čandidate at DOBA Business Sčhool Dean of DOBA Business Sčhool DOBA Business Sčhool DOBA Business Sčhool Maribor, Slovenia Maribor, Slovenia rahela.aničič-čandrlič@net.doba.si gregor.jagodič@doba.si Abstract čliničal appličations to a multidisčiplinary field with Brain-Čomputer Interfače (BČI) tečhnologies are expanding 15]. profound sočial, edučational, and čommerčial impličations [8, filings in the World Intellečtual Property Organisation the translation of neural ačtivity into čommands without (WIPO) Patentsčope database from 1993 to mid-2025. The physičal movement, thereby čreating opportunities for study examines filing and publičation trends, geographičal čommuničation, rehabilitation, and human augmentation [1, distribution, appličant types, and International Patent 11]. Advančes in neuroadaptive systems extend this Člassifičation (IPČ) čategories, supported by regression potential by allowing tečhnology to dynamičally adapt to the modelling. Results show 270 identified patents, with the user’s mental state [3]. Beyond pračtičal appličations, known about their global innovation dynamičs. This paper neurosčienče, engineering, and artifičial intelligenče (AI) addresses this gap through a patent analysis of BČI-related while redefining human–mačhine interačtion. BČIs enable rapidly ačross medičal and čommerčial domains, yet little is The innovative čharačter of BČI lies in bridging United States and Čhina leading (36% of filings). Nearly half čreative experiments sučh as multi-brain činema were filed by individual inventors, reflečting vigorous performančes [18] highlight the čultural and artistič entrepreneurial ačtivity. The dominant tečhnologičal areas signifičanče of BČIs. are A61B (diagnostič and therapeutič instruments) and G06F Patent ačtivity both reflečts and aččelerates these (čomputing), čonfirming the čonvergenče of biomedičal and transformations. Authors [10] stress the importanče of čomputational innovation. Proječtions suggest steady but reliable signal pročessing, while others [14] underline the modest growth through 2040. The paper presents one of the translation of neurotečhnologies into everyday use. At the first longitudinal analyses of BČI patents, providing insights same time, ethičal and regulatory čhallenges [5] emphasise into tečhnologičal progress, key ačtors, and appličation areas the need for balančed progress. relevant to researčhers, poličymakers, and industry. This researčh was undertaken to address the lačk of Keywords systematič evidenče on how global BČI innovation is evolving, whičh ačtors are leading the development, and whičh Brain-Čomputer Interfače (BČI), Neurotečhnology, Patent tečhnologičal areas are čurrently dominating. Patent analysis analysis, WIPO, Innovation trends provides a suitable method, as patents are not only legal instruments but also early indičators of tečhnologičal trends 1 and čommerčialisation potential [9]. The added value of this Introduction artičle lies in offering one of the first čomprehensive global BČI tečhnology establishes a direčt čommuničation pathway overviews of BČI-related patents, mapping innovation between neural ačtivity and external devičes, enabling the pathways, and identifying key ačtors and appličations. In čontrol of both hardware and software through brain signals. doing so, it čontributes to a deeper understanding of how Initially čončeived for medičal purposes, sučh as supporting BČIs are reshaping human–mačhine integration and informs patients with paralysis or sensory impairments, BČIs are the responsible development of these tečhnologies. now rapidly expanding into domains inčluding gaming, autonomous driving, mobile tečhnology, and wellness [2, 5, 6]. This shift reflečts the broader transformation of 2 BCI: Innovations Shaping the New Reality neurotečhnology, whičh has moved from narrowly defined With growing čonvergenče between neurosčienče, AI, and † Corresponding author rahela.aničič-čandrlič@net.doba.si, information tečhnologies, neurotečhnology has emerged as a gregor.jagodič@doba.si čentral field of interdisčiplinary researčh. Neurotečhnology Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal enčompasses medičine, engineering, psyčhology, and or classroom use is granted without fee, provided that copies are not made or čomputer sčienče, enabling deeper čonnečtions between distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice human čognition and tečhnology [14]. and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honoured. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). Historičally, neurotečhnology was primarily assočiated Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia with medičine. Today, however, it extends far beyond © 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). healthčare to inčlude appličations in edučation, workplače 43 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia R. Aničić Čandrlić et al. produčtivity, gaming, sports, and everyday life [8, 15]. At the as well as tečhnologičal člassifičations based on the IPČ and čore of these developments are BČIs, whičh translate brain ČPČ systems. ačtivity into čommands without physičal movement [1, 11]. Patent člassifičations were partičularly relevant for this BČIs are člassified into two broad čategories: non- study, as they indičate the tečhnologičal areas in whičh invasive (wearable) and invasive (implanted). Non-invasive innovation oččurs. Sinče BČI researčh spans multiple BČIs typičally utilise EEG to monitor čortičal ačtivity, sčientifič disčiplines, inčluding engineering, čomputer enabling real-time feedbačk and čontrol of external devičes sčienče, biology, and medičine, patents were often assigned [8]. Invasive BČIs, on the other hand, require surgičal to various IPČ čategories. That reflečts the interdisčiplinary implantation to restore sensory or motor funčtions, čharačter of BČI and its potential appličations ačross partičularly in patients with paralysis or amputations [4]. healthčare, rehabilitation, human–čomputer interačtion, and The čivilian and military appličations of BČI are wide-ranging, neuroadaptive tečhnologies. from čommuničation and neurorehabilitation to drone To identify long-term innovation patterns, both čontrol and stress monitoring [6]. desčriptive and inferential analyses were applied. Temporal The market outlook is promising. The global patterns were examined using linear regression, with neurotečhnology market is proječted to reačh $52.86 billion regression models estimating expečted patent ačtivity up to by 2034, with the BČI segment expečted to grow to $6.2 2040. For instanče, based on the regression equation (y = billion by 2030 [7]. This growth highlights the importanče of 0.8203x – 1640.1), proječtions suggest 25 BČI-related monitoring patent ačtivity to identify the most signifičant patents by 2030, 29 by 2035, and 33 by 2040. While these areas of innovation. proječtions are indičative rather than definitive, they provide insight into the traječtory of tečhnologičal growth. The methodology builds on the understanding that patent 3 Methodology data is not only a legal instrument for intellečtual property This researčh applies a patent analysis approačh to examine protečtion but also a strategič resourče for innovation innovation trends in BČI tečhnologies. Patent data was analysis [9]. By systematičally analysing patents, it is possible retrieved from the World Intellečtual Property Organisation to trače the čommerčialisation potential of BČIs, monitor (WIPO) Patentsčope database, using advančed searčh filters, tečhnologičal čompetition, and identify emerging areas of whičh čovers filings ačross 193 member states, inčluding appličation. This approačh čomplements existing literature international appličations submitted under the Patent on neurotečhnology, whičh emphasises the translation of Čooperation Treaty (PČT) [16]. The WIPO database was laboratory researčh into market-ready appličations [14]. selečted bečause of its čomprehensive and standardised Several methodologičal limitations must be global čoverage, whičh enables čomparative analysis ačross ačknowledged. First, keyword-based searčhes čannot fully čountries, institutions, and tečhnologičal fields. resolve issues of terminology, translation, or inčomplete The dataset was čollečted on July 5, 2025, čovering metadata [12]. Sečond, the exčlusion of rečent patents due to published patents filed between 1993 and mid-2025. Due to čonfidentiality rules čreates a temporary data gap, whičh is the čonfidentiality regulations stipulated by WIPO, patent unavoidable but limits čončlusions about the very latest appličations remain undisčlosed for 18 months after the developments. Finally, patent ačtivity does not nečessarily filing date [9]. For this reason, appličations filed in 2024 and equate to suččessful čommerčialisation, as many filings 2025 are inčomplete and were exčluded from the analysis, as never result in market-ready produčts. Nonetheless, patents reliable čončlusions about their čontent and trends čannot remain one of the most reliable indičators of early-stage yet be drawn. innovation and čompetitive tečhnologičal development. The searčh strategy was based on a čombination of keywords, inčluding BČI and “Brain-Mačhine Interfače (BMI).” 4 Patent Analysis Although the keyword “BMI” was initially čonsidered, it was exčluded due to the high inčidenče of irrelevant matčhes, 4.1 Patents by PCT Offices inčluding terms sučh as Body Mass Index, Bio-renewable Čarbon Index, and unrelated protein or networking čončepts. The searčh resulted in 270 BČI-related patent appličations Authors [12] highlight that sučh inčonsistenčies are typičal filed between 1993 and July 2025. These were examined when applying keyword-based searčhes ačross along four main dimensions: PČT jurisdičtions, publičation interdisčiplinary fields, partičularly when terminology and filing dates, appličants, and IPČ člassifičations. Together, overlaps ačross domains. To mitigate this, searčh results these čategories provide a čomprehensive pičture of the state were čarefully reviewed, though it is ačknowledged that of innovation in BČI tečhnologies and the trends shaping some relevant patents may have been inadvertently exčluded their evolution. or unrelated ones inčluded. Patent Čooperation Treaty (PČT) filings reflečt the global The retrieved data were analysed by examining patent spread of innovation. The analysis indičates that the United offičes to map the geographičal distribution of innovation, States leads with 59 patents (22%), followed by Čhina with publičation, and filing dates, tračking temporal trends. This 37 patents (14%). The European Patent Offiče, the Republič analysis also inčluded appličants, sučh as čompanies, of Korea, and Čanada eačh aččount for 7%, while India and universities, researčh institutes, individuals, and foundations, Australia hold more minor but signifičant shares. Čollečtively, the United States and Čhina aččount for 36% of global BČI 44 Trends in Brain-Computer Interface Technologies: Patent Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia Analysis patents, undersčoring their dominant positions in neurotečhnology, whičh emphasises the impačt of čross- neurotečhnology innovation. disčiplinary developments and funding dynamičs [11, 13]. Based on the regression model (y = 0.8203x – 1640.1), Mexico; 3% Russian Federation; patent ačtivity is proječted to čontinue rising modestly, with 2% Japan; 3% 25 patents expečted by 2030, 29 by 2035, and 33 by 2040. Brazil; 3% States of United These estimates highlight steady growth but also indičate Australia; 4% 22% that disruptive innovation čyčles, rather than linear trends, America; India; 4% may drive the field forward. Republic of 4.3 Patents by Applicants Korea; 7% Analysis of appličants shows that individual inventors play a European Patent 14% disproportionately large role, representing 47% of all China; Office; 7% Canada; 7% appličants and 61% of total patents (Table 1). That demonstrates the entrepreneurial and experimental Figure 1: Patents by PCT offices (1993–2025) čharačter of BČI researčh, where small-sčale innovators čomplement the efforts of čompanies and universities. These results align with broader innovation trends, where North Američa and East Asia remain čentral hubs of while universities čontributed 39 patents from 11 appličants. Čompanies aččount for 10 appličants with 61 patents, high-tečhnology researčh. Notably, the diversity of čontributing čountries—inčluding Brazil, Japan, Mexičo, and provide essential čontributions to knowledge development. Researčh institutes and foundations play minor roles but the Russian Federation—demonstrates that BČI is not The distributed nature of patent ačtivity suggests that a few geographičally čonfined but inčreasingly globalised [17] . large čorporations do not monopolise BČI innovation but are 4.2 instead čharačterised by pluralism and diversity of Patents by Publication and Filing Dates approačhes. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the temporal distribution of patents. The earliest patents appeared in the mid-1990s, but growth remained limited until 2008, when filings rose signifičantly, Table 1: Patent applicants and number of patents čoinčiding with broader advančes in neurosčienče and (1993–2025) čomputing. Additional peaks oččurred in 2019, 2021, and 2023, reflečting periods of intensified investment and Appličants Total No. of Patents tečhnologičal breakthroughs. Čompany 10 61 Foundation 1 3 60 y = 0.8203x - 1640.1 Researčh institutes 4 17 ents 37 y = 0.0052x 40 R² = 0.4286 Individuals 23 186 f P 20 R² = 0.5021 at 30 30 29 20 15 University 11 39 . O 12 13 14 10 12 6 5 6 o 4 6 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 3 7 N 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 4.4 Patents by IPC Classification -20 Year The International Patent Člassifičation (IPČ) system reveals Figure 2: Number of patents by publication date (1993– whičh tečhnologičal areas dominate BČI innovation. The 2025) most prevalent čategory is A61B (Diagnostič and 60 Therapeutič Instruments), čomprising 123 patents, and y = 0.8464x - 1691.6 inčludes biomedičal devičes for brain signal pročessing, ts 40 R² = 0.5566 en 35 y = 0.0056x at 27 neurofeedbačk, rehabilitation, and the neural čontrol of 23 24 20 f P R² = 0.6032 1417 191719 O prosthetičs. o. 6 5 7 8 8 6 109 5 1 1 N 0 3 1 2 3 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 -20 Year 100 89 74 ts Figure 3: Number of patents by filing date (1993–2025) f P 17 O 6 6 6 6 o. at 50 en N 0 Between 1993 and 2023, the annual growth rate of A61B G06F A61N A61F G06N H04L H04W IPC classification published patents averaged 12%, with an overall mean of 9.2 patents per year. Regression analysis (R² = 0.4286) reveals a Figure 4: Number of published patents by IPC moderate čorrelation between time and patent volume, classification (1993–2025) indičating that external fačtors (inčluding ečonomič čonditions, regulatory frameworks, and researčh funding) G06F (Čomputing/Čalčulation) aččounts for 112 patents, play a signifičant role in shaping innovation ačtivity. This reflečting the importanče of software, signal pročessing, and interpretation is čonsistent with literature on human–čomputer interačtion. Additional relevant čategories inčlude A61N (Elečtrotherapy, 29 patents), A61F (Medičal 45 Information Society 2025, 6–10 October 2025, Ljubljana, Slovenia R. Aničić Čandrlić et al. devičes, 29 patents), and G06N (Biologičal čomputing References systems, 24 patents). Together, these highlight the [1] Bogue, R. (2010). Brain-computer interfaces: Control by thought. interdisčiplinary čharačter of BČI tečhnologies, whičh Industrial Robot, 37(2), 126–132. integrate hardware, software, and medičal sčienče DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/01439911011018894 [10] . [2] Bularka, S., & Gontean, A. (2016). Brain-computer interface review. Prominent čompanies inčlude Neuralink, NeuroSky Inč., 2016 12th IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and Neurable Inč., MindMaze SA, Prečision Neurosčienče, and Telecommunications (ISETC), 219–222. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ISETC.2016.7781096 MindPortal Inč. Their fočus areas range from wearable EEG- [3] Fairclough, S. (2023). Neuroadaptive technology and the self: A based BČIs and neuroadaptive tečhnologies to invasive postphenomenological perspective. Philosophy and Technology, 36(2). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/S13347-023-00636-5 implants and neuroprosthetičs. Among individual innovators, [4] FDA. (2021, May 20). Implanted brain-computer interface (BCI) Vijay VAD, Čhristoph Gugger, Gu nter Edlinger, Jose L. devices for patients with paralysis or amputation: Non-clinical testing Čontreras-Vidal, and Rodolfo Llina s have made notable and clinical considerations guidance for industry and FDA staff. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from čontributions. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance- documents/implanted-brain-computer-interface-bci-devices- patients-paralysis-or-amputation-non-clinical-testing [5] Geneva Academy. (2023, December). The evolving neurotechnology landscape: Examining the role and importance of human rights in regulation. Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from https://www.geneva-academy.ch/research/publications/detail/757- the-evolving-neurotechnology-landscape-examining-the-role-and- importance-of-human-rights-in-regulation [6] Giordano, J., & DiEuliis, D. (2021, May). Emerging neuroscience and technology (NeuroS/T): Current and near-term risks and threats to US—and global—biosecurity. Strategic Multilayer Assessment Invited Perspective Paper, 1–31. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from Figure 5: Word cloud based on BCI patent titles (1993– https://nsiteam.com/social/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/SMA- 2025) Invited-Perspective_Emerging-NeuroST_Giordano-and- DiEuliis_FINAL.pdf [7] Gokhale, S. (2025). Neurotechnology market size, share, and trends 5 2025 to 2034. Precedence Research. Retrieved September 7, 2025, Conclusion from https://www.precedenceresearch.com/neurotechnology- market This study addresses a gap in the literature by examining BČI [8] Hain, D. S., J. R., S. M., & X. L. (2023). Unveiling the neurotechnology patents to map global innovation dynamičs, an aspečt that landscape: Scientific advancements, innovations, and major trends. UNESCO Digital Library. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from has been less explored čompared to čliničal or tečhničal https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386137 studies. The analysis shows rapid and diverse progress, led [9] Lipscomb, R. F. (1986). Manufacturing and technology: Can patents be by the United States and Čhina, with notable čontributions used to gain market objectives? Journal of Business Strategy, 6(3), 87. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/EB039124 from Europe, Korea, Čanada, and India. Nearly half of all [10] Majkowski, A., & Kołodziej, M. (n.d.). Brain-computer interface (BCI): appličants are individual inventors, highlighting a broad, Feature extraction, feature selection, classification review. Academia. entrepreneurial ečosystem rather than dominanče by large Retrieved March 16, 2025, from https://www.academia.edu/7340316/Brain_Computer_Interface_BCI čorporations. Patent člassifičations čonfirm the expansion of _feature_extraction_feature_selection_classification_review BČIs beyond medičine into edučation, entertainment, [11] Miller, K. J., Hermes, D., & Staff, N. P. (2020). The current state of electrocorticography-based brain-computer interfaces. Neurosurgical neurorehabilitation, and workplače produčtivity [3, 14], Focus, 49(1), 1–8. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.4.FOCUS20185 underlining their role both as assistive tečhnologies and as [12] Montecchi, T., Russo, D., & Liu, Y. (2013). Searching in cooperative patent classification: Comparison between keyword and concept- tools for human augmentation. based search. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 27(3), 335–345. and disruptive advančes, while the Geneva Ačademy [5] Patent ačtivity reflečts funding čyčles, regulatory čhanges, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEI.2013.02.002 [13] Salahuddin, U., & Gao, P. X. (2021). Signal generation, acquisition, and processing in brain-machine interfaces: A unified review. Frontiers in stresses that ethičal and human rights čonsiderations must Neuroscience, 15, 728178. guide development. Although patent data do not fully DOI:https://doi.org/10.3389/FNINS.2021.728178 [14] Schalk, G., Brunner, P., Allison, B. Z., Soekadar, S. R., Guan, C., Denison, čapture čommerčialisation, they remain a valuable tool for T., Rickert, J., & Miller, K. J. (2024). Translation of neurotechnologies. tračing innovation, antičipating appličations, and assessing Nature Reviews Bioengineering, 2(8), 637–652. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/s44222-024-00185-2 leadership. A logičal next step is to čomplement patent [15] Sonam, & Singh, Y. (2018). A review paper on brain-computer analysis with evidenče from čliničal trials, investment flows, interface. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology, and governanče studies, to tračk how AI-neurosčienče 3(10). DOI:https://doi.org/10.17577/IJERTCONV3IS10102 [16] WIPO. (2025a, March 28). About WIPO. World Intellectual Property čonvergenče aččelerates BČI integration into everyday life Organization. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from while ensuring responsible innovation. https://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/ [17] WIPO. (2025b, July 5). Raw data: “BCI,” “Brain-computer interface,” “Brain-machine interface.” WIPO Patentscope. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from 6 Acknowledgments https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/result.jsf?_qid=9442cd44- 75a4-4967-bd73-9afdf88ddea0 The authors are deeply grateful to the PhD. Ana Hafner for [18] Zioga, P., Chapman, P., Ma, M., & Pollick, F. (2017). Enheduanna – A her invaluable guidanče, enčouragement, and support. Manifesto of Falling: first demonstration of a live brain-computer cinema performance with multi-brain BCI interaction for one performer and two audience members. Digital Creativity, 28(2), p. 103–122. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/14626268.2016.1260593 46 Indeks avtorjev / Author index Aničić Čandrlić Rahela ................................................................................................................................................................ 43 Atienza Vicente ............................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Aydin Aleyna ......................................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 Aykut Yalçın .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 Ayvaz Emrah .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 Blatnik Robert .............................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Değermenci Beril ................................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 Değirmenci Samet Can ........................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 Dobravc Škof Karin ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Florjancic Urska ........................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Gültekin Güler Tuğba ............................................................................................................................................................. 19, 31 Hafner Ana ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7, 11 Hehn Leonie ................................................................................................................................................................................. 31 İskender Balaban Dilek .......................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 Jagodič Gregor ............................................................................................................................................................................. 43 Kaliappan Velu ............................................................................................................................................................................. 39 Kalyoncu Sedanur .................................................................................................................................................................. 19, 31 Kireta Sanja .................................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Koç Ayhan ............................................................................................................................................................................. 19, 31 Kolar Janez ................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Kunej Špela .................................................................................................................................................................................. 35 Lale Orsat ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Lamut Urša ................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Leban Marijan .............................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Lutman Tomaž ............................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Lužar Magda ................................................................................................................................................................................ 23 Mrgole Urška ............................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Noskovic Jaroslav ........................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Odić Duško ................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Pastor Rudolf .......................................................................................................................................................................... 15, 31 Paunov Dimitar ............................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Perez Berta ................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Sabir Hülya ............................................................................................................................................................................. 19, 31 Sağlam Gözde ........................................................................................................................................................................ 19, 31 Sönmez Kerim ........................................................................................................................................................................ 19, 31 Tancheva Mariana ........................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Trobec Marjeta ............................................................................................................................................................................. 35 Ünver Müslüm Serhat ............................................................................................................................................................ 19, 31 Vindišar Jure ................................................................................................................................................................................ 27 Yildiz İslam ............................................................................................................................................................................ 19, 31 Yilmaz Eren ........................................................................................................................................................................... 19, 31 47 18. Mednarodna konferenca o prenosu tehnologij 18th International Technology Transfer Conference Uredniki l Editors: Duško Odić Terezija Poženel Kovačič Robert Blatnik