Since the late 1990s the government of Malaysia has increased emphasis on its Intensification of Research in Priority Areas (IRPA) program, focusing scientific research in universities and government research institutes (GRIs) on activities most likely to enhance national economic performance. The IRPA’s main purpose is to fund commercially viable research for the benefit of business. However, its 2001 mid-term review showed its rates and volumes of commercialization and technology transfer (CTT) to be inadequate.
This study aimed to explain the perceived low rate of adoption and commercialization of scientific knowledge in manufacturing in Malaysia by exploring the actions of companies, universities and GRIs. Two main models of technical change, the Technik and the STH ones, were used.
Fieldwork was carried out in Malaysia. Purposive sampling led to selection of 60 interviewees: 23 managers and professionals from companies, 17 scientists, eight Technology Transfer Office officers, six senior research administrators, three venture capitalists, two journalists and a politician. The interviews were open-ended.
It was seen that research findings were not always relevant to company interests, and companies often preferred their own or adopted, sometimes reverse-engineered, technology. Government CTT funds did not help much in with design, prototypes and pilot plants. Inadequate communication and lack of trust influenced the low uptake of research findings.
The commercial relevance of much scientific research was questioned. More government support for company risk-taking appeared to be needed. Differences in attitude and poor understanding of policies and principles tended to contribute to low uptake. Managers, professional, scientists, Technology Transfer Officers, senior research administrators, venture capitalists needed more flexibility, knowledge and skills to respond to profit-driven research findings. A specifically Malaysian approach to CTT was advocated
