## 1 Introduction  
Moving from research projects to technological development is not always easy since some university-industry relationships are not sufficiently communicative about the research areas that the industries are investigating. Additionally, some universities are not inclined to deal with real problems. Only theoretical aspects are covered in engineering courses, so the students do not know the market needs and are not prepared to propose and implement a startup. Moreover, some universities' research centers do not seek industrial partners because their primary funding is governmental. New educational models, especially in engineering departments, include IP courses to promote technology transfer. Higher education requires TTOs that fund research projects that create new products. Ideally, TTOs should be involved in research projects from the beginning because they can strategize to bring attractive new products to the marketplace. Therefore, students and researchers must know the primary capabilities of their TTO and integrate them into the strategic plan of their research. This means that TTOs must have sustainable financial systems in the universities. It is impossible to develop and promote technology in the universities if the TTOs do not play a fundamental role in the organization. Besides, the TTO can provide students and researchers with intellectual property information when planning a funding strategy. On the other hand, universities receive significant public resources to fuel innovation via research, and they are under increasing pressure to measure and improve their impact on society. When federally sponsored research mechanisms support the capabilities of TTOs in universities, there are three main options [1]:  
* Universities could market new inventions using internal funds. * Universities could hire private companies that market the inventions. * Universities could prepare students and researchers to improve the new technology and consider developing a startup business plan. The TTOs in universities have a low commercialization rate; sometimes, this condition is attributed to the lack of adequate training staff and invention processing capacity [1]. Besides, the high-tech technology that could be created in universities does not have a particular market segment and, therefore, the commercialization process can be complicated. Since TTOs contribute to the universities' societal impact, TTOs have to improve their commercialization rates. A TTO can encourage and facilitate the transfer of innovations primarily through patents, copyrights, licenses, and other agreements. The impact of these reverberates throughout the value chain for existing companies and startups. For example, every dollar invested in a new company or startup generates an additional 1.8 dollars of indirect and induced value [2]. From a university's internal perspective, most institutions would welcome a TTO that breaks even and is self-sustaining over the long haul. However, many typical TTO metrics, such as the number of invention disclosures and patents, have little impact or correlation with income. In general, the standards for invention disclosures are low, and the historical number of patents does not represent a measure of financial value. Many universities have rallied around their TTOs, much like one of their sports teams. Even if the office's budget has to be heavily supplemented year after year, there is public relations value, school spirit, and rankings that underlie the continuation of financial support. As mentioned in [3], the technology portfolio is the core of all the business in a firm. One of the main goals is to decrement risk and increment business opportunities by managing a set of technologies, resources, and markets. It is also important to mention that there are other factors that OTMs in universities can follow. For instance, a university technology transfer office's goal could be to increment the social impact of technology and not focus only on licensing revenue.