6. Conclusion
We believe our study makes several contributions. So far, the Economics of Innovation literature has remained almost silent about the dynamic interaction between formal and informal channels for knowledge transfer between university and industry. As Hughes (2001) suggests, the relationship between the knowledge transferred through various formal channels (as licensing and consulting) could be the subject of discussions on property rights. Similarly, our data suggest that the transfer of knowledge broadly related to the comb drive patent occurred through formal collaboration channels other than patent licensing. However, our evidence adds a new insight to the relationship between the knowledge transferred through formal and informal channels. Dur- ing the Advanced Institute consultancy for Sensor Technologies, MEMS designs were fabricated by both Advanced Institute and Sensor Technologies facilities, which improved Advanced Institute’s fabrication capabilities based on knowledge transferred via personal contacts. The relationship between the design knowledge transferred via formal consultancy activity and the fabrication knowledge transferred from industry to university (and, ultimately, to local entrepreneurs through the WMLA programme) did not seem to raise concerns over property rights, which suggests that, in these kinds of dynamic interactions, knowledge generated during formal transfer activities could be transferred via informal channels.
